Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,325 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 257,809
Pageviews Today: 360,268Threads Today: 84Posts Today: 1,672
03:53 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?

 
Bowyn Aerrow

User ID: 22229335
United States
08/26/2012 02:55 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Math and science are wonders to behold.

The moon's gravity was calculated long ago, well before we sent the first probe to the moon to measure it. We knew well before we sent men there how much energy and fuel was needed to achieve escape velocity to get into orbit of the moon.

Thus the lander was designed to hold enough fuel not only to land, but to send a part of itself back up into orbit to meet the orbiting part of the space craft.

The lander basically broke into 2 parts at launch, the base and legs are still on the moon. these are not equal parts, the lander legs and base were a bit larger than the launch vehicle, containing the equipment needed for the moon, such as hammers, screw drivers, cameras and the flag, rover and various other things.

Further, they shed mass by leaning behind things like the flag pole, the moon rover and a few cameras and other things.

The lander/launch vehicle didn't fly all the way back to the earth. While it was brought to the moon by the main vehicle, it was left on the moon and art of it left in lunar orbit (to eventually crash back onto the lunar surface.

The whole trip was calculated very closely. Trajectories, orbits, amount of fuel needed to lift X amount of mass - all of it was calculated as close as possible. Easy to do if you know the math formulas.

The 3 astronauts didn't take off by themselves. Their ship was tied in via radio to ground based computers. Their on-board computer is mostly just a data holder, the calculations were done back on earth in huge computers.

There was a pilot on board. The landing was done by stick - meaning a man piloted the lander down. The launch sequence was automatic with the ability for the pilot to override.

The moon, having such a low gravity and no real atmosphere was 'easy' to launch from. Earth is more complex, having a deep gravity well, thick atmosphere which brings wind and weather into effect.
"My Dog, its full of fleas!"
-David Bowwow


“A paranoid is someone who knows a little of what's going on. A psychotic is a guy who's just found out what's going on.”
- William S. Burroughs
kcdub0184

User ID: 12893372
United States
08/26/2012 02:55 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
[youtube] [link to youtu.be]
 Quoting: kcdub0184


This is these best imagery/footage of ohr visits to the moon oht there!
~the secret to life is to AwakeN before death~(realizing there is no death)~

~How would you approach life if you knew your every thought/emotion dictated every aspect of your projected physical reality?~
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 6231580
United States
08/26/2012 02:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Anyone care to explain to me HOW did they manage to film the lift off from moon surface, with camera movement and zoom in and out?

And don't bother to tell me they used earth commands to do it - it was impossible back then.

Oh and there was a delay of 4-5 seconds for voice - so imagine for camera work.

anyone?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22399618


Which mission? Earlier missions they filmed using a camera inside the LEM. Later missions a camera was left on a tripod outside and filmed the LEM liftoff using a remote.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12905163


Remote huh genius?

Proof? Data? Who remoted it? HOW?

Some of you americans are smart as a rock.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22399618


Ed Fendell in mission controll remotely controlled the camera. The slightest bit of searching would have found you that info. So sad that Google is broken for you.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14143765


means DICK, considering the source, no credibiity in the establishment ANYMORE.. no credibiity. They have the credibility of the MSM... i.e nada
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/26/2012 02:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Look at the entrance of the module. With space suits on they cannot fit thru opening. Rip off!
 Quoting: congineer 17009595


Except for the pictures and video that show them fitting through the opening.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22633247
United States
08/26/2012 02:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
We are sending robots to mars and people still don't think we could have sent people to the moon?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19058378


you are talking 1960s dude.
use your brains. The computers back then are 1000x bigger than the IBM PC XT but less computing power.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22641710

i know that in 1969 the only computers they had were
a couple-a-hundred single transistors silk-screened
onto a 4x4 inch fiberglass board, that didn't even work.

(and, in the 1960s all they had was punch-cards for data transfer)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/26/2012 02:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
How the hell could any scientist speculate that 3 astronauts would be able to take off by themseves?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


You don't even know the first thing about the subject.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 13806508

i know that in 1969 the only computers they had were
a couple-a-hundred single transistors silk-screened
onto a 4x4 inch fiberglass board, that didn't even work.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247


And? So what? The major calculations for the Moon landing were done on large mainframes on Earth. The computer on each Apollo only had to act on those calculations.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 6231580
United States
08/26/2012 02:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Math and science are wonders to behold.

The moon's gravity was calculated long ago, well before we sent the first probe to the moon to measure it. We knew well before we sent men there how much energy and fuel was needed to achieve escape velocity to get into orbit of the moon.

Thus the lander was designed to hold enough fuel not only to land, but to send a part of itself back up into orbit to meet the orbiting part of the space craft.

The lander basically broke into 2 parts at launch, the base and legs are still on the moon. these are not equal parts, the lander legs and base were a bit larger than the launch vehicle, containing the equipment needed for the moon, such as hammers, screw drivers, cameras and the flag, rover and various other things.

Further, they shed mass by leaning behind things like the flag pole, the moon rover and a few cameras and other things.

The lander/launch vehicle didn't fly all the way back to the earth. While it was brought to the moon by the main vehicle, it was left on the moon and art of it left in lunar orbit (to eventually crash back onto the lunar surface.

The whole trip was calculated very closely. Trajectories, orbits, amount of fuel needed to lift X amount of mass - all of it was calculated as close as possible. Easy to do if you know the math formulas.

The 3 astronauts didn't take off by themselves. Their ship was tied in via radio to ground based computers. Their on-board computer is mostly just a data holder, the calculations were done back on earth in huge computers.

There was a pilot on board. The landing was done by stick - meaning a man piloted the lander down. The launch sequence was automatic with the ability for the pilot to override.

The moon, having such a low gravity and no real atmosphere was 'easy' to launch from. Earth is more complex, having a deep gravity well, thick atmosphere which brings wind and weather into effect.
 Quoting: Bowyn Aerrow


i suppose they brought the 4wd moon dune buggy just to fuck around ... that tels me its all bullshit, fantasy... the moon dune buggy lol
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/26/2012 02:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
they went into lunar orbit to join up with the CSM
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22634579

Now, that's interesting.

Joining up with an orbiting body (what was orbiting velocity and trajectory?), with no navigational equipment worth mentioning? That's quite a feat on this side of possible, but deep within the zone of improbable.

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


Good thing they practiced and perfected the technique during the Gemini program then!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22633247
United States
08/26/2012 03:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
the big leap forward (after the transitor) was photo
mico-etching for ICs
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22631821
United States
08/26/2012 03:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Anyone care to explain to me HOW did they manage to film the lift off from moon surface, with camera movement and zoom in and out?

And don't bother to tell me they used earth commands to do it - it was impossible back then.

Oh and there was a delay of 4-5 seconds for voice - so imagine for camera work.

anyone?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22399618


How was it impossible? Please cite your sources. You even got the delay wrong showing just how little research you've done. Even with a delay, so what? Is it impossible to know the launch time, know the delay, know the acceleration and start panning at the appropriate time?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14143765


For a Malaysian, YES.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21990535
United States
08/26/2012 03:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
It was only the 3 astronauts, right? No rocket scientists. No reconstructed apparatus. And what about the operations of firing a rocket WITH 3 MEN AND FUEL, CAMERA'S etc FROM THE MOON? How the hell could any scientist speculate that 3 astronauts would be able to take off by themseves? From point zero, the amount of fuel needed? What about the times; we needed to send disinfo to the Soviet Union... 1+1 = 2.

It was fake. Recondition your mind: Aint NO ONE been on the moon.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


The OP thinks these are thoughtful and intelligent questions.

They only reveal OP's stupidity and ignorance.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22633247
United States
08/26/2012 03:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
It was only the 3 astronauts, right? No rocket scientists. No reconstructed apparatus. And what about the operations of firing a rocket WITH 3 MEN AND FUEL, CAMERA'S etc FROM THE MOON? How the hell could any scientist speculate that 3 astronauts would be able to take off by themseves? From point zero, the amount of fuel needed? What about the times; we needed to send disinfo to the Soviet Union... 1+1 = 2.

It was fake. Recondition your mind: Aint NO ONE been on the moon.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


The OP thinks these are thoughtful and intelligent questions.

They only reveal OP's stupidity and ignorance.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21990535


the conspiracy theories LIVE!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/26/2012 03:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
I am saying that the real conspiracy is not that Neil Armstrong never went to the Moon. He did go there, or near there as it were, but he never LANDED on it.

Think of it like this:
a) Joining up with an orbiting body - a big no-no for ANY technological power at that time, including the U.S.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619

So you've never heard of the Gemini program where they practiced this very thing?

b) Joining up with a body in STATIONARY orbit - possible, but what makes it very improbable in this case is that command module would've had to DECELERATE while approaching the Moon, drop off the lunar module, and than ACCELERATE again after joining up the module coming off the Moon. BOTH operations would've required ENORMOUS amounts of fuel.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619

Good thing they had the SIV-B to get them there and the Service module to stabilize their orbit once there and push them back. The math works. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it didn't work.


c) All Moon missions of that time had to have been simple SLINGSHOT MANEUVERS around the Moon. There was no technology available at that time to land there AND get back. One could've landed on the Moon, of course, but they would've NEVER been able to return.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Whether it's possible to land on the Moon AND come back today, is something I would not speculate on. I have my suspicions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619

They DID have the technology available. You just haven't bothered to do the slightest bit of research into any of it.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
08/26/2012 03:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Anyone care to explain to me HOW did they manage to film the lift off from moon surface, with camera movement and zoom in and out?

And don't bother to tell me they used earth commands to do it - it was impossible back then.

Oh and there was a delay of 4-5 seconds for voice - so imagine for camera work.

anyone?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22399618


Which mission? Earlier missions they filmed using a camera inside the LEM. Later missions a camera was left on a tripod outside and filmed the LEM liftoff using a remote.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12905163


More accurately, there was already a remote-controlled camera attached to the rover. It was used throughout the rover EVAs. All they had to do is park it a specific distance away from the LM, and as the countdown was received at Houston, hit the "pan up" button on "One!" instead of on "liftoff!"

Still took three tries to estimate the pan rate correctly; only one of the videos manages to keep the ascent module in frame.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 6231580
United States
08/26/2012 03:04 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
they went into lunar orbit to join up with the CSM
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22634579

Now, that's interesting.

Joining up with an orbiting body (what was orbiting velocity and trajectory?), with no navigational equipment worth mentioning? That's quite a feat on this side of possible, but deep within the zone of improbable.

Those "lunar modules" were, more or less, just sealed cans of packed human meat, far from interplanetary spaceships that people usually imagine them to be.

How about this conspiracy theory then? They did go to the Moon, but they never landed there. It was all a show for the Soviets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


are you saying that it's a conspiracy against the conspiracy, or what?

i'm getting confused, now...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247

I am saying that the real conspiracy is not that Neil Armstrong never went to the Moon. He did go there, or near there as it were, but he never LANDED on it.

Think of it like this:
a) Joining up with an orbiting body - a big no-no for ANY technological power at that time, including the U.S.
b) Joining up with a body in STATIONARY orbit - possible, but what makes it very improbable in this case is that command module would've had to DECELERATE while approaching the Moon, drop off the lunar module, and than ACCELERATE again after joining up the module coming off the Moon. BOTH operations would've required ENORMOUS amounts of fuel.
c) All Moon missions of that time had to have been simple SLINGSHOT MANEUVERS around the Moon. There was no technology available at that time to land there AND get back. One could've landed on the Moon, of course, but they would've NEVER been able to return.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Whether it's possible to land on the Moon AND come back today, is something I would not speculate on. I have my suspicions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


this is the jist of this thread.

It was clearly a fantasy story because the USSR was kicking our ass and we needed an immediate response... its all a soviet union psy op to make them think we were farther along than they were.

I think the proof is that we haven't gone back, and all the shuttle missions since then have been orbiting operations, not landing ops.... the moon is a tactical resource... of COURSE we would go back, if for no other reason than an observatory.

So man on moon = bullshit.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/26/2012 03:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
It was only the 3 astronauts, right? No rocket scientists. No reconstructed apparatus. And what about the operations of firing a rocket WITH 3 MEN AND FUEL, CAMERA'S etc FROM THE MOON? How the hell could any scientist speculate that 3 astronauts would be able to take off by themseves? From point zero, the amount of fuel needed? What about the times; we needed to send disinfo to the Soviet Union... 1+1 = 2.

It was fake. Recondition your mind: Aint NO ONE been on the moon.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


it took the Saturn 5 rocket to escape Earth's gravity.

the Moon is 20% of Earth's gravity.

so, it would take 20% of a Saturn 5 to escape Moon's gravity!

yer right: it's all a FAKE!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247


Wrong. It took a Saturn V to escape Earth's gravity, THROUGH the atmosphere (adds friction), AND carry the craft necessary to get to Moon, land, take off again and come back. All that needed to lift off from the Moon was just what was needed to get from the surface to lunar orbit. The math works.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14143765


after you get 2 miles high, there ain't that much friction buck-o.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247


2 miles? So all the airliners that fly at 6 or 7 miles don't have to worry about friction at all? Or the SR-71 that was nearly 20 miles up didn't heat up to hundreds of degrees on its skin just from friction? You might want to check the facts there buck-o.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22633247
United States
08/26/2012 03:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
...

Now, that's interesting.

Joining up with an orbiting body (what was orbiting velocity and trajectory?), with no navigational equipment worth mentioning? That's quite a feat on this side of possible, but deep within the zone of improbable.

Those "lunar modules" were, more or less, just sealed cans of packed human meat, far from interplanetary spaceships that people usually imagine them to be.

How about this conspiracy theory then? They did go to the Moon, but they never landed there. It was all a show for the Soviets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


are you saying that it's a conspiracy against the conspiracy, or what?

i'm getting confused, now...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247

I am saying that the real conspiracy is not that Neil Armstrong never went to the Moon. He did go there, or near there as it were, but he never LANDED on it.

Think of it like this:
a) Joining up with an orbiting body - a big no-no for ANY technological power at that time, including the U.S.
b) Joining up with a body in STATIONARY orbit - possible, but what makes it very improbable in this case is that command module would've had to DECELERATE while approaching the Moon, drop off the lunar module, and than ACCELERATE again after joining up the module coming off the Moon. BOTH operations would've required ENORMOUS amounts of fuel.
c) All Moon missions of that time had to have been simple SLINGSHOT MANEUVERS around the Moon. There was no technology available at that time to land there AND get back. One could've landed on the Moon, of course, but they would've NEVER been able to return.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Whether it's possible to land on the Moon AND come back today, is something I would not speculate on. I have my suspicions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


this is the jist of this thread.

It was clearly a fantasy story because the USSR was kicking our ass and we needed an immediate response... its all a soviet union psy op to make them think we were farther along than they were.

I think the proof is that we haven't gone back, and all the shuttle missions since then have been orbiting operations, not landing ops.... the moon is a tactical resource... of COURSE we would go back, if for no other reason than an observatory.

So man on moon = bullshit.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


NASA is nothing but a big CGI studio!

(and a bunch of junk rockets at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean.)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22478071
United States
08/26/2012 03:09 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
More importantly how did they get through the Van Allen Belt to get to the moon in the first place. Would have needed 10 tons of lead for that.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21186169


Obama turned off the van Allen belt for safe passage silly, everyone knows that!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 14143765
United States
08/26/2012 03:09 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
...

Now, that's interesting.

Joining up with an orbiting body (what was orbiting velocity and trajectory?), with no navigational equipment worth mentioning? That's quite a feat on this side of possible, but deep within the zone of improbable.

Those "lunar modules" were, more or less, just sealed cans of packed human meat, far from interplanetary spaceships that people usually imagine them to be.

How about this conspiracy theory then? They did go to the Moon, but they never landed there. It was all a show for the Soviets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


are you saying that it's a conspiracy against the conspiracy, or what?

i'm getting confused, now...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247

I am saying that the real conspiracy is not that Neil Armstrong never went to the Moon. He did go there, or near there as it were, but he never LANDED on it.

Think of it like this:
a) Joining up with an orbiting body - a big no-no for ANY technological power at that time, including the U.S.
b) Joining up with a body in STATIONARY orbit - possible, but what makes it very improbable in this case is that command module would've had to DECELERATE while approaching the Moon, drop off the lunar module, and than ACCELERATE again after joining up the module coming off the Moon. BOTH operations would've required ENORMOUS amounts of fuel.
c) All Moon missions of that time had to have been simple SLINGSHOT MANEUVERS around the Moon. There was no technology available at that time to land there AND get back. One could've landed on the Moon, of course, but they would've NEVER been able to return.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Whether it's possible to land on the Moon AND come back today, is something I would not speculate on. I have my suspicions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


this is the jist of this thread.

It was clearly a fantasy story because the USSR was kicking our ass and we needed an immediate response... its all a soviet union psy op to make them think we were farther along than they were.

I think the proof is that we haven't gone back, and all the shuttle missions since then have been orbiting operations, not landing ops.... the moon is a tactical resource... of COURSE we would go back, if for no other reason than an observatory.

So man on moon = bullshit.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


The USSR was only ahead (and then only barely) until the start of the Gemini program. During that they fell far behind. But let's think about the illogical statement you made. The USSR were ahead but then we fooled them? If they were so far ahead, then how could they have been fooled? In actuality they tracked the Apollo missions from start to finish.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
08/26/2012 03:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
The camera was mounted on the front of the abandoned lunar rover and remotely controlled from Houston. The pan-up command was sent 1.3 seconds early to account for the delay. It's obvious from the jerky motions best observed from 32:30 that it's controlled by motors and that it can only do one thing at a time (pan down, pan right, zoom etc). There's footage from some EVA missions where Mission Control operated the camera while both astronauts move around in view. Next time read, don't guess.


Yeah same camera that waited there to captured him going down the ladder...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1472892


Close.

Yes, the camera started the mission bolted upside-down to the MESA (an equipment pallet hinged the LM like a Murphy Bed). From the "porch" on the LM the descending astronaut could pull a lanyard unlatching the MESA. That put the camera in a position to see the ladder. There was a switch at Goldstone (and so forth) to flip the image.

In early missions the camera was then moved to a tripod. On Rover missions, it was moved to the rover -- in both cases, it was bolted to a pan-tilt mechanism that could be operated remotely from Houston.

Some of the egress of the second astronaut was also captured by the DAC; a 16mm film camera shooting approximately one frame per second, on a fixed tripod.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 6231580
United States
08/26/2012 03:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Anyone care to explain to me HOW did they manage to film the lift off from moon surface, with camera movement and zoom in and out?

And don't bother to tell me they used earth commands to do it - it was impossible back then.

Oh and there was a delay of 4-5 seconds for voice - so imagine for camera work.

anyone?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22399618


Which mission? Earlier missions they filmed using a camera inside the LEM. Later missions a camera was left on a tripod outside and filmed the LEM liftoff using a remote.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12905163


More accurately, there was already a remote-controlled camera attached to the rover. It was used throughout the rover EVAs. All they had to do is park it a specific distance away from the LM, and as the countdown was received at Houston, hit the "pan up" button on "One!" instead of on "liftoff!"

Still took three tries to estimate the pan rate correctly; only one of the videos manages to keep the ascent module in frame.
 Quoting: nomuse (not logged in) 2380183


whats sad is, i woud gladly "play along" with the governments version, till i found out the government is captured by iinternational elites and bankers, and is now turning against its own people, throwing out the constitution and it is no longer a representative gov, but an elitist dictatorship, now that the security apparatus is captured by the elite, it cannot be trusted, and SHOUD be exploited... every aspect of it IMO... until we reestablish a constitutional, representative government.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 21942897
United States
08/26/2012 03:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Let us suppose, that there are two NASA's. One is a black op. That one flies around in their saucers. The one we are shown is a totally different technology, which is like the difference between a horse drawn chariot and a Cadillac.

Stay with me here, please. So, the operation paperclip NAZIS were brought over here, with their latest and greatest achievements in aerospace technologies and were put to work at different bases nationwide, mostly below ground. They sell us on rocket technology which is their most ancient and go from their. The fuel systems on these rockets are detrimental to man and his entire environment but that is par for the course for the eugenics people.

Anyway, as the real space ships are advancing in their size and scope, TPTB keep it all secret except for ones who need to know and in most cases not even the President is in the loop. They load what they need aboard a UFO, to continue the farce shown to the public. Off to the moon they go loaded with more than just the Lunar Lander and Moon go carts, they were carrying deadly weapons!

Once they arrived and unloaded the props, they went searching around until they found what they thought was some kind of base. You have seen the videos of their exploration of this abandoned area.

Meanwhile, back at the ship, they are experiencing an alien presence which is communicating their displeasure with the human contrived weapons aboard and they are all rendered useless. They are told to leave and never come back, in fact we were told we will no longer be able to go any further than 300 miles into space, as long as we have intentions of harm and weapons capable of creating universal disturbances. I am not sure if that includes unmanned vehicles but my sense says the ones which meant any harm were rendered useless sometime in flight.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22633247
United States
08/26/2012 03:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
More importantly how did they get through the Van Allen Belt to get to the moon in the first place. Would have needed 10 tons of lead for that.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21186169


the Van Allen Belt shields Earth from the murderous
solar radiation in open Space. even the ISS has to
stay in low-Earth orbit (below the Van Allen Belt) to
protect the astronauts from the murderous solar radiation.
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 6231580
United States
08/26/2012 03:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
...


are you saying that it's a conspiracy against the conspiracy, or what?

i'm getting confused, now...
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247

I am saying that the real conspiracy is not that Neil Armstrong never went to the Moon. He did go there, or near there as it were, but he never LANDED on it.

Think of it like this:
a) Joining up with an orbiting body - a big no-no for ANY technological power at that time, including the U.S.
b) Joining up with a body in STATIONARY orbit - possible, but what makes it very improbable in this case is that command module would've had to DECELERATE while approaching the Moon, drop off the lunar module, and than ACCELERATE again after joining up the module coming off the Moon. BOTH operations would've required ENORMOUS amounts of fuel.
c) All Moon missions of that time had to have been simple SLINGSHOT MANEUVERS around the Moon. There was no technology available at that time to land there AND get back. One could've landed on the Moon, of course, but they would've NEVER been able to return.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Whether it's possible to land on the Moon AND come back today, is something I would not speculate on. I have my suspicions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


this is the jist of this thread.

It was clearly a fantasy story because the USSR was kicking our ass and we needed an immediate response... its all a soviet union psy op to make them think we were farther along than they were.

I think the proof is that we haven't gone back, and all the shuttle missions since then have been orbiting operations, not landing ops.... the moon is a tactical resource... of COURSE we would go back, if for no other reason than an observatory.

So man on moon = bullshit.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


The USSR was only ahead (and then only barely) until the start of the Gemini program. During that they fell far behind. But let's think about the illogical statement you made. The USSR were ahead but then we fooled them? If they were so far ahead, then how could they have been fooled? In actuality they tracked the Apollo missions from start to finish.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 14143765


I'm just saying there was a need for counter propagandism, ahead or not, the fact is for a hypothesis (statement that the man on the moon theory is TRUE), to be true it must be repeatable.... there has been no repeat.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
08/26/2012 03:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
they went into lunar orbit to join up with the CSM
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22634579

Now, that's interesting.

Joining up with an orbiting body (what was orbiting velocity and trajectory?), with no navigational equipment worth mentioning? That's quite a feat on this side of possible, but deep within the zone of improbable.

Those "lunar modules" were, more or less, just sealed cans of packed human meat, far from interplanetary spaceships that people usually imagine them to be.

How about this conspiracy theory then? They did go to the Moon, but they never landed there. It was all a show for the Soviets.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


Nope. You are an idiot.

Multiple radars (approach, guidance, landing). RCS system. Inertial guidance and star tracking. Guidance computer. Multiple channels of communication on several different bands.

Oh, and spacecraft of the same general type had been making orbital rendezvous for about ten years at that point. A few years after Apollo, there was even Apollo-Soyuz; linking two spacecraft built by two different nations and shot from very different locations in different original orbital planes.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
08/26/2012 03:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Lets do the analysis:

Weight: 10,300 lbs
Thrust: 3,500 lbs
APS specific impulse: 311 sec
APS propellant mass: 5,187 pounds
Gravity moon: 1.624 m/s²
CSM speed = 3649.3 mph

Orbit assumed to be 100 km (numbers from 100km to 160km are listed and CSM could come to within 20 km of the moon)

Simple test is V = AT

Given the starting acceleration of 1G, the time is around 170 seconds.

The fuel consumption of 11.3 lb/s. 11.3*170 = 1921 lbs.

So they had more fuel than they needed - 2.5 times as much. Some of this was used to correct the orbit etc. etc. This is one reason Apollo 13 fared so well, they had fuel to burn.



yer cooking the books.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247


Prove it, then. Show the error.


(Incidentally, I've tried the same using as few numbers from NASA as possible; estimating tank volume from the cutaway, using the theoretical ISP for the propellant, also including gravitational drag, and I had a margin of 30% left.)
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 19507663
Netherlands
08/26/2012 03:22 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Would not the Soviets have tracked each mission?
 Quoting: NZ Coward 22619927

They sure would.

Did they ever come out and say it didn't happen?
 Quoting: NZ Coward 22619927

They did come out and said it did happen.
[link to rt.com]
book

i know that in 1969 the only computers they had were
a couple-a-hundred single transistors silk-screened
onto a 4x4 inch fiberglass board, that didn't even work.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247

Than you know wrong.

The AGC is very well documented, and it indeed did use intergrated circuits. In fact it was one of the first computers to do so.
[link to klabs.org]
book

they went into lunar orbit to join up with the CSM
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22634579

Now, that's interesting.

Joining up with an orbiting body (what was orbiting velocity and trajectory?), with no navigational equipment worth mentioning?
 Quoting: Czech Coward 1466619

FTW are you talking about?
Why the fuck do hoaxies LIE all the time?
book

We are sending robots to mars and people still don't think we could have sent people to the moon?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19058378

you are talking 1960s dude.
use your brains. The computers back then are 1000x bigger than the IBM PC XT but less computing power.
 Quoting: Malaysian Coward 22641710

That's why they kept most of the computers required for the mission in a nice airconditioned building in Houston.
They did have radio back than, you know.
book
Hatred is a cancer upon the world.
It rots the mind and blackens the heart.


Hi! My name is Halcyon Dayz and I'm addicted to morans.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 22633247
United States
08/26/2012 03:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
Lets do the analysis:

Weight: 10,300 lbs
Thrust: 3,500 lbs
APS specific impulse: 311 sec
APS propellant mass: 5,187 pounds
Gravity moon: 1.624 m/s²
CSM speed = 3649.3 mph

Orbit assumed to be 100 km (numbers from 100km to 160km are listed and CSM could come to within 20 km of the moon)

Simple test is V = AT

Given the starting acceleration of 1G, the time is around 170 seconds.

The fuel consumption of 11.3 lb/s. 11.3*170 = 1921 lbs.

So they had more fuel than they needed - 2.5 times as much. Some of this was used to correct the orbit etc. etc. This is one reason Apollo 13 fared so well, they had fuel to burn.



yer cooking the books.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 22633247


Prove it, then. Show the error.


(Incidentally, I've tried the same using as few numbers from NASA as possible; estimating tank volume from the cutaway, using the theoretical ISP for the propellant, also including gravitational drag, and I had a margin of 30% left.)
 Quoting: nomuse (not logged in) 2380183


seriously. your knowledge of Physics is respected and much
appreciated. but, there are still very vexing questions that
persist about this whole matter. and, so, we will continue
to banter about.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
08/26/2012 03:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
I am saying that the real conspiracy is not that Neil Armstrong never went to the Moon. He did go there, or near there as it were, but he never LANDED on it.

Think of it like this:
a) Joining up with an orbiting body - a big no-no for ANY technological power at that time, including the U.S.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


Stupidly wrong. Look up "Angry Alligator" some time. Orbital rendezvous WAS a tough nut, so they made sure to work on it a lot in Earth orbit. And (Apollo 10) in lunar orbit.

And, really, EVERY spacecraft that lands on another world is having to join up with an orbiting body.


b) Joining up with a body in STATIONARY orbit - possible, but what makes it very improbable in this case is that command module would've had to DECELERATE while approaching the Moon, drop off the lunar module, and than ACCELERATE again after joining up the module coming off the Moon. BOTH operations would've required ENORMOUS amounts of fuel.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


What the fracking hell is a "Stationary" orbit?

Anyhow, your profile for the C/SM (not the CM at that stage) is dead wrong. It arrives at the Moon and performs a circularizing burn. It is thus in a low and stable lunar orbit. The LM detaches, comes in and lands in a path along the plane of the C/SM's orbit. The ascent stage lifts off and accelerates along that same plane. It is timed, also; they know damned well where the C/SM is the entire time.

The astronauts transfer, the ascent stage is discarded to crash back on the Moon, the SM engine lights to put them back on intercept with the Earth.

The delta-v for each stage of this operation is easy to look up (and slightly more difficult to calculate) and the propellant masses are documented. There are no mysterious and hidden maneuvers required.



c) All Moon missions of that time had to have been simple SLINGSHOT MANEUVERS around the Moon. There was no technology available at that time to land there AND get back. One could've landed on the Moon, of course, but they would've NEVER been able to return.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Whether it's possible to land on the Moon AND come back today, is something I would not speculate on. I have my suspicions.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1466619


Not gravity assist, actually. More like free-return trajectories -- an elongated ellipse with the apogee further out from Earth than the Moon is.

But I assume from the above that you are denying ALL landings, manned and unmanned, other than direct-to-impact such as the Ranger probes or the early Lunas.

But of course you are too pig-ignorant to be specific about whatever technology you think is missing.
nomuse (not logged in)
User ID: 2380183
United States
08/26/2012 03:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: If the Moon landing was real: How the hell did they take off FROM the moon?
whats sad is, i woud gladly "play along" with the governments version, till i found out the government is captured by iinternational elites and bankers, and is now turning against its own people, throwing out the constitution and it is no longer a representative gov, but an elitist dictatorship, now that the security apparatus is captured by the elite, it cannot be trusted, and SHOUD be exploited... every aspect of it IMO... until we reestablish a constitutional, representative government.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 6231580


Translation:

"My technical reasons for disbelieving in the Apollo Missions were shown to be illogical and lacking in any factual basis. So I'll just retreat to a position of hand-waving about politics and making shit up, and pretend it didn't matter that I was wrong before."

News