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.

This is these best imagery/footage of ohr visits to the moon oht there!

means DICK, considering the source, no credibiity in the establishment ANYMORE.. no credibiity. They have the credibility of the MSM... i.e nada

Except for the pictures and video that show them fitting through the opening.

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)

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.

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

Good thing they practiced and perfected the technique during the Gemini program then!

the big leap forward (after the transitor) was photo
mico-etching for ICs

For a Malaysian, YES.

The OP thinks these are thoughtful and intelligent questions.

They only reveal OP's stupidity and ignorance.

the conspiracy theories LIVE!

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


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.



They DID have the technology available. You just haven't bothered to do the slightest bit of research into any of it.

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.

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.

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.

NASA is nothing but a big CGI studio!

(and a bunch of junk rockets at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean.)

Obama turned off the van Allen belt for safe passage silly, everyone knows that!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.)

They sure would.


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



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]



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



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.

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.

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.




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.





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.

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."