The Moon Mission
Discussion
Simir said:
CellarDoor said:
Jim H said:
Right.
I’m talking about the sixties.
No Carbon Fibre. No CFD. Little knowledge about aerodynamics. No advanced Electrical Systems (I’m talking about the phone)
And this massive firework just set off and travelled all those miles. What is it nearly 300 K?
Stopped right on point.Ejected a capsule. Lowered one man down onto a place that was little understood. Perfectly took off again.
Used gravity to get back?
I’m going to look this up.
I’m sure Werner Von Braun said that the fuel to get there would be impossible
Think again.
The sixties remember.
Perhaps stop digging. Next you'll be looking for explanations for the flag wave after the astronaut walked near it @ 2:37 as opposed to the obvious reasons this would happen in a vacuum:I’m talking about the sixties.
No Carbon Fibre. No CFD. Little knowledge about aerodynamics. No advanced Electrical Systems (I’m talking about the phone)
And this massive firework just set off and travelled all those miles. What is it nearly 300 K?
Stopped right on point.Ejected a capsule. Lowered one man down onto a place that was little understood. Perfectly took off again.
Used gravity to get back?
I’m going to look this up.
I’m sure Werner Von Braun said that the fuel to get there would be impossible
Think again.
The sixties remember.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymwE1sNm82Y
Watch the Mythbusters episode on this topic. It shows how all the "moan hoaxer" theories (including their crackpot ideas about the waving flags) can be explained.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yET8Z1D2PUM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yET8Z1D2PUM
Jim H said:
This thread just keeps giving
I’m still laughing like hell at it.
What started out as a bit of pissed up musing
It’s pulled all and sundry out !
Pistonheads keeps providing
Night gentlemen.
You posted some if your stupidest input in mid-afternoon.I’m still laughing like hell at it.
What started out as a bit of pissed up musing
It’s pulled all and sundry out !
Pistonheads keeps providing
Night gentlemen.
You claimed an eminent and rich physicist had explained to you personally how it couldn’t have been done.
Fusion777 said:
So you’re fine with the fact that we’ve landed unmanned probes on the moon and orbited it. What about humans in space- do you acknowledge they’ve been put in orbit (some are there currently)?
How about men orbiting the moon, which happened before the landings?
Just interested where your line of skepticism is.
In his world it seems we didn’t have the ability to fly men to the moon, but did have the ability to construct extremely advanced robots, and instead fly them to the moon, in secret.How about men orbiting the moon, which happened before the landings?
Just interested where your line of skepticism is.
I wonder where they hid them in the Apollo project’s rockets.
MikeM6 said:
My view is that to believe the moon landings are not real or the earth is flat is not a lack of intelligence at all, but more...etc
It's the lack of an ability to weigh evidence and to consider the validity of sources and a need for self importance (look at me, 'they' are keeping stuff from you but I'm special and can see through it). It absolutely is a lack of basic intelligence. I suspect that the posters pushing this nonsense are no surprise to anyone given their contributions elsewhere.Oh, and there are not 'both sides' to a discussion on whether the Earth is flat or the Moon landings were faked FFS
Eric Mc said:
There were, altogether, 11 manned Apollo missions within the lunar landing programme -
Apollos 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,12,13,14,15,16 and 17.
Of these, Apollos 7 and 9 orbited the earth only. The other 9 missions orbited the moon. Of those, Apollos 11,12,14,15,16 and 17 landed putting 12 men on the surface.
The final three landings allowed the astronauts to stay on the lunar surface for three days.
The missions brought back over 800 pounds of moon rock which has been made available to the scientific community to study - so apart from the 400,000 who worked directly on the programme in period, thousands more from scientific institutions all over the world have had access to the moon rocks brought back by Apollo. These rocks are being studied to this very day and new discoveries are still being made from them.
In addition to the lunar missions, four more manned Apollo flights were made between 1973 and 1975 - three being ferry missions to the Skylab space station and the final Apollo flight being the joint Soviet/American Apollo Soyuz Test Project (ASTP).
Some of the artifacts used by the Apollo lunar missions are still sitting on the surface of the moon and have been observed and photographed by more recent space missions - operated by both NASA and other, non-American space agencies. Some of the Apollo hardware is still in space and has been observed from earth, such as the SIVB upper stage from the Apollo 12 mission which is still orbiting the sun.
The evidence for the missions is absolutely overwhelming and anyone who chooses to doubt them needs to assess their own mental state of mind and not that of the thousands, if not millions, who rightly acknowledge the astounding success of Apollo and what a great achievement it was for mankind.
I agree with space historian James E Oberg who describes those who chose to disbelieve the moon landings as "cultural vandals" - akin to those who take a hammer to a Michelangelo statue or who throws paint over a Rembrandt.
That seems pretty conclusive. I'll be interested to see a rebuttal to the above from anyone.Apollos 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,12,13,14,15,16 and 17.
Of these, Apollos 7 and 9 orbited the earth only. The other 9 missions orbited the moon. Of those, Apollos 11,12,14,15,16 and 17 landed putting 12 men on the surface.
The final three landings allowed the astronauts to stay on the lunar surface for three days.
The missions brought back over 800 pounds of moon rock which has been made available to the scientific community to study - so apart from the 400,000 who worked directly on the programme in period, thousands more from scientific institutions all over the world have had access to the moon rocks brought back by Apollo. These rocks are being studied to this very day and new discoveries are still being made from them.
In addition to the lunar missions, four more manned Apollo flights were made between 1973 and 1975 - three being ferry missions to the Skylab space station and the final Apollo flight being the joint Soviet/American Apollo Soyuz Test Project (ASTP).
Some of the artifacts used by the Apollo lunar missions are still sitting on the surface of the moon and have been observed and photographed by more recent space missions - operated by both NASA and other, non-American space agencies. Some of the Apollo hardware is still in space and has been observed from earth, such as the SIVB upper stage from the Apollo 12 mission which is still orbiting the sun.
The evidence for the missions is absolutely overwhelming and anyone who chooses to doubt them needs to assess their own mental state of mind and not that of the thousands, if not millions, who rightly acknowledge the astounding success of Apollo and what a great achievement it was for mankind.
I agree with space historian James E Oberg who describes those who chose to disbelieve the moon landings as "cultural vandals" - akin to those who take a hammer to a Michelangelo statue or who throws paint over a Rembrandt.
Eric Mc said:
Watch the Mythbusters episode on this topic. It shows how all the "moan hoaxer" theories (including their crackpot ideas about the waving flags) can be explained.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yET8Z1D2PUM
Thanks Eric, I shall skim through it. I was hoping for a one sentence explanation from the knowledge contributors on here as google seems to refer to explanations as to why the flag waves whilst the astronauts are planting it - which is obvious. I haven't seen an explanation as to why the flag waves when an astronaut walks past it though - I was just intrigued by the reason for this.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yET8Z1D2PUM
And just by coincidence, this morning, the Chinese successfully landed their second lunar probe on the far side of the moon (Chang'e 6) . This is a great achievement and is only the second time that a lander has touched down on the moon's far side. This one is a sample return mission so the plan is that it will bring back to earth the first lunar material from the moon's far side.
The only other sample return missions to the moon have been Apollo (of course) and a small number of Soviet era Luna missions (Luna 16,20 and 24).
Just for context, the three Soviet sample return missions returned about 200 to 300 grams of material in total. Apollo brought back 382 KILOGRAMS.
I expect the Chinese probe will bring back a sample size something similar to the Russian missions.
The only other sample return missions to the moon have been Apollo (of course) and a small number of Soviet era Luna missions (Luna 16,20 and 24).
Just for context, the three Soviet sample return missions returned about 200 to 300 grams of material in total. Apollo brought back 382 KILOGRAMS.
I expect the Chinese probe will bring back a sample size something similar to the Russian missions.
My view of the hoax crowd is much less nuanced. At it's height, the Apollo progam employed 400,000 people & 20,000 companies & universities. If you said three quarters of those at a rough estimate were functionaries involved in manufacturing, admin, logistics etc, the workaday element of any industrial enterprise then you are left with somewhere around 100,000 people involved at an elevated level. Planning, flight, engineering and all the rest of it.
If you're telling me that in 60+ years, not even one of those people has let the cat out of the bag, much less done so & been corroborated by a single peer or colleague, then I'm telling you you don't uderstand human nature.
Even setting aside all of the other iron clad proof, you cannot escape the sheer impossibility of tens of thousands of people keeping secret the greatest deception of modern times. The landings happened, stop being ridiculous.
If you're telling me that in 60+ years, not even one of those people has let the cat out of the bag, much less done so & been corroborated by a single peer or colleague, then I'm telling you you don't uderstand human nature.
Even setting aside all of the other iron clad proof, you cannot escape the sheer impossibility of tens of thousands of people keeping secret the greatest deception of modern times. The landings happened, stop being ridiculous.
Simir said:
I haven't seen an explanation as to why the flag waves when an astronaut walks past it though - I was just intrigued by the reason for this.
It doesn't.The flag moves only when a force acts on it (basic Newtonian physics). Moving the flagpole causes the flag to "wave" until the vibration caused by the movement of the flagpole damps out - at which point the flag stops moving.
Unless the flag or the flag pole is physically touched again, the flag will not wave.
The TV images sent back by Apollo, especially on Apollo 11, were extremely crude and brightness and sharpness of the images could fluctuate. This can sometimes make it seem that something has moved when in reality, it hasn't. It's just the rather rubbishy TV images causing odd effects. The last three missions (15,16 and 17) had much better quality TV (and in colour) and you get far less of these electronic TV anomalies.
One thing I am looking forward too when people return to the moon is the vastly improved TV images we will get compared to what was possible over 50 years ago. Even the images sent back by the recent robot landers have sent back lovely sharp still and video images which are way better than what Apollo era TV could manage.
jameswills said:
MiniMan64 said:
This thread is so depressing.
Humans manage these amazing feats of exploration and invention and 60 years later people sit around calling it b
ks.
Explain it to me then, as a lay person Humans manage these amazing feats of exploration and invention and 60 years later people sit around calling it b
ks. But if you’re going to question the Moon landing science (and vaccine science from your favourite thread) then why not stop there?
What about the internet? That’s clearly b
ks, sending images and information through thin air? From an object the size of a pack of cards? Obviously fake. Why about combustion? Pouring a flammable liquid into a block of metal and it just magically makes that car move? Alright then. Not.
IVF? You’d made a baby outside the human body? How dumb do you think I am?
Antarctica? A whole continent, made of ice? That no one except a few liars have ever seen? And everyone just believes what they seen on a map? Wow.
Eric Mc said:
It doesn't.
The flag moves only when a force acts on it (basic Newtonian physics). Moving the flagpole causes the flag to "wave" until the vibration caused by the movement of the flagpole damps out - at which point the flag stops moving.
Unless the flag or the flag pole is physically touched again, the flag will not wave.
The TV images sent back by Apollo, especially on Apollo 11, were extremely crude and brightness and sharpness of the images could fluctuate. This can sometimes make it seem that something has moved when in reality, it hasn't. It's just the rather rubbishy TV images causing odd effects. The last three missions (15,16 and 17) had much better quality TV (and in colour) and you get far less of these electronic TV anomalies.
One thing I am looking forward too when people return to the moon is the vastly improved TV images we will get compared to what was possible over 50 years ago. Even the images sent back by the recent robot landers have sent back lovely sharp still and video images which are way better than what Apollo era TV could manage.
See also, famously windy television studios.The flag moves only when a force acts on it (basic Newtonian physics). Moving the flagpole causes the flag to "wave" until the vibration caused by the movement of the flagpole damps out - at which point the flag stops moving.
Unless the flag or the flag pole is physically touched again, the flag will not wave.
The TV images sent back by Apollo, especially on Apollo 11, were extremely crude and brightness and sharpness of the images could fluctuate. This can sometimes make it seem that something has moved when in reality, it hasn't. It's just the rather rubbishy TV images causing odd effects. The last three missions (15,16 and 17) had much better quality TV (and in colour) and you get far less of these electronic TV anomalies.
One thing I am looking forward too when people return to the moon is the vastly improved TV images we will get compared to what was possible over 50 years ago. Even the images sent back by the recent robot landers have sent back lovely sharp still and video images which are way better than what Apollo era TV could manage.
Eric Mc said:
One thing I am looking forward to when people return to the moon is the vastly improved TV images we will get compared to what was possible over 50 years ago. Even the images sent back by the recent robot landers have sent back lovely sharp still and video images which are way better than what Apollo era TV could manage.
On behalf of Physics teachers everywhere, I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. HD footage from the Moon is going to cause some very welcome replanning of our lessons on forces. MiniMan64 said:
Eric Mc said:
One thing I am looking forward to when people return to the moon is the vastly improved TV images we will get compared to what was possible over 50 years ago. Even the images sent back by the recent robot landers have sent back lovely sharp still and video images which are way better than what Apollo era TV could manage.
On behalf of Physics teachers everywhere, I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. HD footage from the Moon is going to cause some very welcome replanning of our lessons on forces. 
Video here -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYEgdZ3iEKA
Note the TV picture quality - which isn't bad for July 1971.
Eric Mc said:
Simir said:
I haven't seen an explanation as to why the flag waves when an astronaut walks past it though - I was just intrigued by the reason for this.
It doesn't.The flag moves only when a force acts on it (basic Newtonian physics). Moving the flagpole causes the flag to "wave" until the vibration caused by the movement of the flagpole damps out - at which point the flag stops moving.
Unless the flag or the flag pole is physically touched again, the flag will not wave.
The TV images sent back by Apollo, especially on Apollo 11, were extremely crude and brightness and sharpness of the images could fluctuate. This can sometimes make it seem that something has moved when in reality, it hasn't. It's just the rather rubbishy TV images causing odd effects. The last three missions (15,16 and 17) had much better quality TV (and in colour) and you get far less of these electronic TV anomalies.
One thing I am looking forward too when people return to the moon is the vastly improved TV images we will get compared to what was possible over 50 years ago. Even the images sent back by the recent robot landers have sent back lovely sharp still and video images which are way better than what Apollo era TV could manage.
I can believe that it's probably a trick of the camera given the low resolution. I thought there may be a more intriguing answer given the flag is still and then waves after the astronaut passes by - perhaps something I didn't understand about vibrations in space as the footage from 2:36 from 2:39 is fascinating and I can't stop watching it.
President Merkin said:
Eric Mc said:
It doesn't.
The flag moves only when a force acts on it (basic Newtonian physics). Moving the flagpole causes the flag to "wave" until the vibration caused by the movement of the flagpole damps out - at which point the flag stops moving.
Unless the flag or the flag pole is physically touched again, the flag will not wave.
The TV images sent back by Apollo, especially on Apollo 11, were extremely crude and brightness and sharpness of the images could fluctuate. This can sometimes make it seem that something has moved when in reality, it hasn't. It's just the rather rubbishy TV images causing odd effects. The last three missions (15,16 and 17) had much better quality TV (and in colour) and you get far less of these electronic TV anomalies.
One thing I am looking forward too when people return to the moon is the vastly improved TV images we will get compared to what was possible over 50 years ago. Even the images sent back by the recent robot landers have sent back lovely sharp still and video images which are way better than what Apollo era TV could manage.
See also, famously windy television studios.The flag moves only when a force acts on it (basic Newtonian physics). Moving the flagpole causes the flag to "wave" until the vibration caused by the movement of the flagpole damps out - at which point the flag stops moving.
Unless the flag or the flag pole is physically touched again, the flag will not wave.
The TV images sent back by Apollo, especially on Apollo 11, were extremely crude and brightness and sharpness of the images could fluctuate. This can sometimes make it seem that something has moved when in reality, it hasn't. It's just the rather rubbishy TV images causing odd effects. The last three missions (15,16 and 17) had much better quality TV (and in colour) and you get far less of these electronic TV anomalies.
One thing I am looking forward too when people return to the moon is the vastly improved TV images we will get compared to what was possible over 50 years ago. Even the images sent back by the recent robot landers have sent back lovely sharp still and video images which are way better than what Apollo era TV could manage.
Of course to ensure secrecy everyone involved was killed but the CIA so there is no one left to corroborate that.
I am doing it right?
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff