by Dee McLachlan, and an account by G5
50 years ago, today, man landed on the moon. Or did they?
The moon landings have always fascinated me, and, in 2015, I wrote an article called “The ‘Armstrong’ Parallel – Two Extraordinary Americans. One Confirmed a Lie and One Undecided.” I wrote:
The name, “Armstrong” represents two extraordinary Americans, both exceptional in their field; One a superbly skilled and bold test pilot, and astronaut – the other, possibly the most exceptional cyclist ever seen (even with the help of EPO).
NASA sent men to walk on the moon SIX times – and Lance Armstrong won the Tour de France SEVEN times. Just one too many. The seventh win tipped the scales of inevitability – and it was most likely his demise. I suggested that maybe NASA knew their luck would run out – one way or another – on #7, and called it a day.
I have reviewed many of the moon photographs, and many are not taken on the moon. But that’s understandable, as we know NASA were recreating the landings on earth in training scenarios. There’s even a large moon in a NASA studio, with camera tracks, on public display (or it used to be).
My personal experience hearing about moon studios goes back to the 90s. I was working on a film in Sri Lanka, and one night the ‘rigger’ (he built the special FX crane for the film) told us — after a few drinks — about when he was a rigger in a studio in 1969 in Phoenix (I think he said Phoenix). He said he was “walking” an astronaut (hung from a crane) across a moon set. They were watching the “live feed” and copying the astronaut (Armstrong) on the moon in case NASA lost their live feed. He said it was a strange experience, as he had wondered whether he was copying another studio. I was fascinated — but he I think he might have regretted telling us, as he never wanted to discuss it again.
And then, to further add confusion, there’s the NASA video where a young engineer on the Orion project explains that humans still have to solve how to get through the radiation belts.
So today’s article I’m covering a few opposite views on the Apollo 11 moon landing — man’s greatest achievement!
The Editorial in The Age
To quote from The Age article, “The day the Earth stood still and watched man on the moon”:
“July 20, 1969. Two men walk on the moon… More than a half a billion people watch grainy black-and-white vision of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin tread upon the dusty surface of Earth’s only satellite. It was a singular moment in humankind’s history. Earthlings had departed their home planet to walk upon alien land. “One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind,” declared Armstrong. He and Aldrin spent two hours on the surface, returned to the module to sleep, and left.
“NASA was created in 1958. A year earlier, the Soviets had launched the first satellite, Sputnik. In 1959, their spacecraft Luna 2 hit the moon, the first man-made object to do so. In 1961, Yuri Gagarin became the first man in space. The US had to do something. The next year President John F. Kennedy, proclaimed: “We choose to go to the moon,” launching the race that culminated on July 20, 1969.
“The cost, however, would be stratospheric. According to a report by the US Congressional Research Service, NASA said the Apollo program from 1960 to 1973 cost $19.4 billion, almost $100 billion in today’s terms…
“But after Apollo 11, the rockets started to lose power. The last moon landing was in December 1972. Over the course of the program, 380 kilograms of lunar rocks and soil samples came back to Earth. It is debatable if greater wisdom, too, came back.”
And now from our contributor G5.
He has told me on several occasions that he was right there on USS Hornet when the Apollo 11 capsule plunged into the sea.
Moon Commentary by G5
The rest of this section is from emails from G5:
Trump, aware of the entrenched, terminal damage, delivered on three occasions that the US walked The Moon. The most recent being at his 2019 SOTU Address.
Some 800 BC, The Chinese were experimenting with the use of kites. By the 5th Century AD, Mozi and Lu Ban had redeveloped the technology, attempting practical applications. Leonardo sketched advanced theories of ‘flight’ in the late 15th Century.
By early 1958 the existence of the first Van Allen Belts was known. And as happens, power in the hands of irresponsible lunatics, delivers what it will. Around 1962 Operations Dominic, Storax, Fishbowl, and Starfish Prime, were underway. The US was going to nuke its way to the Moon. Detonation after detonation in the Ionosphere and Low Earth were intended to move the Van Allen Belts and provide a radio reflective surface for the convenience of the US. Like blowing dust in the air, the Van Allen Belts would move and close back in behind themselves.
The outcome was that the world sprayed with radioactive waste, initially blamed on the Chinese. The Protective Ozone Layer was destroyed, primarily over Australia — now the skin cancer capital of The World.
With no technology, no science, no engineering, no ability, with Van Allen Belts in place, the US was Good To Go, to The Moon.
Disney and Kubrik start shooting at Area 51. Von Braun and some ‘experts’ take a junket to Antarctica, and gather ‘Moon Rocks’.
All ‘Live’ on TV, mom would never lie to you, and 400,000 workers on the project would not all lie. So it had to be real.
From the deck of the USS Hornet we saw the Apollo 11 Capsule dropped by parachutes from the back of an Airforce Freighter. It hit the sea and was collected by a heavy-lift helicopter and brought to the deck.
The flat face was unmarked by re-entry burn, it did not steam when it hit the sea, the parachutes were strap attached to an area where they could not be, if the capsule were not a stage prop. Apart from the inherent tumble instability of the capsule design and weight distribution.
Three little unrigoured faces appeared to the world media from a window on the transition pod. The exchange was curious. Perhaps they were never in that rickety capsule. It was neither hot to touch, nor did it have the pock-markings of re-entry. Which I had seen on one of the Mercury Capsules. It had no radiation protection.
NASA refused to allow Hasselblad to examine the camera, after they stated that it could not have functioned as claimed.
The bilious, repeated, Moon Landing charade, ceased when Russia was able to track all the activities of the US’s greatest Hoax. The advanced Russia was not able to track Lunar Adventurisms, but ‘Live’ Footage was beamed to Earth by the US. Sure it was. Not that it really mattered. The mental systems of US and sycophant herds are only able to absorb US deception.
The greatest achievement of mankind, and NO REAL EVIDENCE EXISTS TODAY. Please, not the museums and theme tours! My digestion.
The three stooges appeared uncomfortable at the following press conference. Many were murdered in an attempt to cover the lie. The imbecile Aldrin, after punching journalists for asking the wrong questions, was asked the same by an eight year old. He admitted the deception. The advance publicity of The Orion Project admits the impenetrable Van Allen Belts.
The Arctic Sling-Shot Exit was a good one. But how did they return? And then, how could an SS Officer manage a missile program, not paralleled to the V2? He was even less than the Morgan-Ford-Carnegie manufactured Edison, sporting Prescott Bush’s stolen Tesla inventions. Von Braun lied his way into an illusion with no substance.
The US is unable to reach Low Earth Orbit. Space-X, the Mars Project, and other illusions, have come to rest on the foundations of their proverbial. It was decided that the last of the ridiculous Shuttles be sent in for an insurance claim. The crew were filmed and returned to their prior careers — and the hoax ‘tragedy’ was staged.
Of course the US walked The Moon a half century ago! But today, the US lacks the technology to return — can’t fly to Low Earth Orbit, and in the Missile Age struts the World with junk Flotsam, and no missile capability. The US at its own hand has become a nation of fools.
To reach the ISS, the US needed the RSA. Sanction Serenades were only really for the herds to believe. When NASA was no longer able to foot the RSA bill, it was decided that NASA could produce fake footage for the adoring and believing morons. They wouldn’t know the stark differences. The illusion rolls on. The upside-down hair of the US Astronautettes is good. And occasionally the acrobatic sling wire belt tetherings pop into view. It loses its comedy value after a while.
One needs to return to reality and purposeful comedy.
Loved the commentary by G5, spot on. Well done. Funny thing, we’ve been inundated with this alleged moon landing bullshit now for two weeks. During that time, the JAPANESE have succeeded in landing on a spinning meteorite flying thru space, drilled holes within it’s core to extract samples and then taken off on it’s journey back to earth. A feat unprecidented by any other nation so far, even the alleged “exceptional” people. Yet has the MSM released that news for the exceptional acheivement it was ????????
Consider too, we are lately being inundated with reports of sooner or later having a rogue meteor strike the earth. We are similarly told, we have no defence whatever for such an event. Yet, here we have the JAPANESE demonstrating that claim is a LIE. And the compliant media is silent, too busy reguritating a 50 year old lie.
There’s folklore , in the seventies the Germans made the the thinnest drill bit ever and sent it Japan . The Japanese drilled a hole through it .
Bit more folk lore for you. The Japanese printed the Bible on the head of a pin.
They forgot the most important New Testament .
Just like the current best selling Bible , in USA , has no New Testament and it starts on the back page . Everything is being inverted to make way for the beast micro chip . In Sweden cash is no longer used for transactions . Next step , to make it even faster , will probably be insertion under skin .
The words of Jesus and the prophets are the only opposition to their insanity .
A video on Neil Armstrong –
https://youtu.be/rvmFeJu4maU
I hope I have the correct link at the end to the NASA press conference.
Seven minutes did it for me………….ever seen three more miserable “techo” “heroes” that have carried out such a fete?
Now for how some reactions when some really score.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWl8vIRdb-A
I don’t know, but I am not prepared to care about them or their supposed exploits.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=apollo+11+press+interview&&view=detail&mid=00C9E6692D70051BDC1A00C9E6692D70051BDC1A&&FORM=VDRVRV
As a eleven year old , still playing cowboys and Indians with my scooter and toy six shooter , I told my grandfather that man had landed on the moon . He laughed , said it was filmed in Nevada and left it at that . He was a skilled tradesman peasant farmer fisherman from a seaside village . At the time I laughed at him , boy was I wrong . Our forebears were way more prepared for the hardships they lived through . Today , if they pull the plug , we will all be chooks in the dark . Tesla’s invention stolen by Edison is our Achilles Heal .
The Moon landings have become a bit of a controversial subject – haven’t they!
My own research has left me in no doubt that the Apollo missions did in actuality occur – there was too much at stake for them not to have been carried out especially when one becomes familiar with the symbolism attached to the Apollo project missions and NASA’s agenda.
The Van Allen Belts seem to be a stumbling block for many to get their heads around in that space craft could actually go through them without any undue effects on the crew inside the craft.
See Popular Science and the article; Apollo rocketed through the Van Allen Belts for a more detailed explanation of the concerns first posed, and then the solution for flying through them.
Richard C Hoagland was a NASA contractor who was terminated for exposing some of NASA’s (Never A Straight Answer) lies and cover ups, but the Moon landings were not among them. Hoagland has won international awards for excellence in science and a Nobel Prize for astronomy but Wikipedia (most unreliable source for TRUTH!) gives him a bum rap as a conspiracy theorist because of his NASA expose’. However, his books on the Moon missions and Mars are very enlightening and revealing, for those who wish to venture there.
Now N tell us why NASA is reported as spending billions on PROJECT ORION working out how to have the latest moon travellers get through the Van Allen belt alive.
Looking at the original trajectory of the Apollo spacecraft they arched AROUND the worst parts of the Van Allen belt. Professor Van Allen helped them with that flight plan.
I’ve listened to a few missions and the transmissions ring true to me (I used to be a military aviator). Apollo 17 was the last mission and the blokes did a lot of work in a very difficult area to access. Of course, they had the previous missions to learn from, but it still does not detract from the success of that mission.
My favorite mission was Apollo 13, the ‘failed’ mission when an oxygen bottle exploded while being stirred. There is a movie about it, but the book is a lot more intensive. I used to be an electronic technician that worked on complex mainframe computer systems and would get some very difficult jobs to troubleshoot down to the component level. I would have LOVED to been on the team that devised the ‘power-down/power-up’ sequence during that emergency – truly brilliant.
Those were the days back in America’s peak as a rational, focused nation. – I now see that the liberal left in America is denigrating those successes as having too many ‘white men’ working on the project. Perhaps the next mission could be put together by a bunch of black, disabled lesbians. Good luck…
Terry, there was some good work by a fellow named Braeunig, now archived, which used location update information to track actual mission trajectory in 3D, and graph that vs the location of the belts at the time of the flight. His calculations for total radiation dose at the individual astronaut tally pretty well with the after-mission radiation exposure reports.
It’s worth remembering that the moon is not precisely on the ecliptic, and the magnetic poles were and are not aligned with the Earth’s axis of rotation. Both of these things work in your favor if you’re trying to miss the belts. Proper timing of the TLI burn can get a spacecraft around the worst parts of the belts. The fact that they left and returned at significant speed also helped. For the un-initiated, it’s like leaving a marble in the center of a donut, trying to get somewhere beyond the donut without having to drill through too much of it.
You might enjoy the Orbiter freeware, along with the NASSP mod that allows “flying” the actual AGC code, and Apollo hardware, in this orbital physics simulator. The mod is also open-source, so it can be verified to be free from “fudges” and other trickery.
It works as advertised. This is running a PC-based emulator of the actual AGC hardware, which in turn is controlling the spacecraft main engines and attitude thrusters, just as the actual spacecraft was controlled by the AGC hardware during the landing.
The problem with the lunar module ascent stage is that the ascent propulsion system (APS) was fixed thrust (non-throtterable) and non-gimballed (could not change thrust angle) at 15000 Newtons of force. The ‘attitude thrusters’ or Reaction Control System (RCS) were mounted on the sides of the 4 metre wide craft. They were only 400 Newtons of thrust. When you write simple Rotational Equilibrium torque calculations – torque = force x distance from turning angle. In order for the ascent stage to remain balanced as it left the surface of the moon, the torque caused by the main rocket (APS) had to be balanced by the torques of the RCS thrusters otherwise the craft would tip over and plunge back into the moon. The problem is that as the craft leaves the moon surface, the fuel and weight depletes (rocket science) to cause thrust, this causes shifts in the 3D craft’s centre of gravity. With only a few centimetres of shift, the 15000N APS thrust was impossible to counter balance by the 400 N RCS causing a spin back into the moon. Thus proving using Physics that no designed lunar module was capable of leaving the surface of the moon. Are there 6 crafts on the moon and 12 dead astronauts up there? I doubt it.
Honest Aussie, So, if the LEM were 100% fake in the first place, why go to all the trouble of making the ascent stage asymmetrical? Maybe because the densities of the two hypergolic propellant components were different and they wanted to maintain c/g as best they could with the tank topology they chose?
Honest Aussie, Please look at the open-source NASSP mod for Orbiter, a hard-physics spaceflight simulator. Near as I can see reading the code, the ascent propulsion system is spec’d according to documentation, along with the RCS thrusters, and an abort, or ascent from the surface works, and gets you into lunar orbit. The AGC is guiding the thrust-vector by pivoting the whole ship. Near as I can tell, fuel masses and moments are modeled.
Are you seriously implying that the (presumably) rocket scientists that designed the ascent stage didn’t understand how the center-of-mass might change as the fuel burned? Apparently the software guys did, as there is code to handle the ascent from the moon, and apparently it worked 6 times plus once for Apollo 10 in a reduced-use-case.
To convince me, you will have to show some numbers that prove that the torque from the main engine in “worst-case” fuel burn state is greater than 2 “left-hand” RCS engines firing vertically one-way, and 2 “right-hand” RCS engines firing vertically the other way.
By my thinking, that “max available” torque is ~90 pounds force x distance from c/g x 4. You could have less torque, of course, by varying the firing duty cycle, as the RCS did. By my blueprints the RCS quads were about 5.7 feet from the engine axis and at about the same vertical datum as the mount-point for the APS engine, where the force was applied.
So, back-of-napkin, you’d be able to counter 5.7 x 90 x 4 foot-pounds of torque, just. 2052 foot-pounds (yeah, not metric, sorry) of torque available. Would you like that in metric?
So, the next question is, can you demonstrate how far “off c/g” the APS engine would have been, worst-case, given that it started off balanced, or nearly so and that equivalent volumes of both fuel parts were burned over time? Would you like the masses and datums of the two 36 cubic foot tanks, and the densities of N2O4 and Aerozine 50?
Hi this is good but there are three complex issues that have not been resolved 1) change of vertical thrust vector 2) non-linear increase of thrust at higher altitudes 3) lack of calculus in NASA documents. 1) as the craft tips (even gradually) the non-gimballed main rocket is fixed perpendicular to the craft and so its thrust vector also changes compared to the moons gravitational downward force vector adding additional complexity to the changing centre of mass and torque. 2) the craft has a reduced weight at higher altitudes in a non-linear way as oxidiser and fuel is pressurised in the nozzle by helium gas (refer NASA statements). This results in a variable net force (downward force of changing weight – upward fixed force of 16000 Newtons). Yet the side thrusters (RCS) are fixed force of 400 newtons. The pulsing of the side thrusters was done by autopilot in the literature yet the exact specifics are missing. 3) calculus is required to work out torque or kinematic formulas with non-constant acceleration – this is very complex and missing from the research papers I have read. They would have had to convert their calculus into 1968 computer algorithms which does not appear to be the case.
Ned, I think with Orion, you have a few things working against success.
I don’t think the folks working on it have as much critical mass of expertise as the US did during the space-race.
Another problem is that the core-rope memory and discreet IC architecture of the Apollo flight computer hardware is being replaced by much more sensitive hardware.
Core-rope memory is virtually impervious to ionizing radiation, unlike modern dense, and highly complex ICs and memories. You can prove it by CAT-scanning your old smartphone. It’ll crash. By contrast, your C-64 could probably be setup to weather through it, if the code was robust and re-startable. If you replaced its ROMs with magnetic core, it’d probably just keep running.
One goal with Orion is to make the thing a whole-lot safer than the Apollo platform was, and that costs big money. The idea is to use something based on Orion to go beyond just the moon.
With radiation, it’s not just about how many Sieverts you got, but for how long, and over how much of your whole body. Short high doses can be less harmful than having that total spread over a long time-period. The flavor of radiation is also significant. Some of it couples well to human DNA, and some doesn’t really at all.
We’re led to believe that all ionizing radiation is equally deadly, but it’s not.
I could sleep with Alpha-emitters under my pillow for years and not suffer anything, but if I ate the same emitters, I’d likely end up dying a nasty death at some point later.
Joe, good comments about the robust nature of magnetic core memory and discreet components. It may have been old technology, but it would take more abuse than the highly integrated chips of today. I hadn’t given it any thought before, but building a spacecraft out of today’s components is going to present a whole different set of potential problems. Crikey, they could be flying along and ZAP! everything just fell-over and won’t be coming back.
There was this story today about the various stations that were monitoring the transmissions from Apollo 11. It should be obvious that those stations, the most important being Australian, could easily determine where the transmissions were coming from.
https://theconversation.com/not-one-but-two-aussie-dishes-were-used-to-get-the-tv-signals-back-from-the-apollo-11-moonwalk-108177
N.
Why do I not smell obfuscation and BS?
Why, are you not aware of NASA Project Orion??
Bugger, I threw out my commodore 64. NASA could have used it….. for free.
Now that we’re on the moon . Did the beach buggy have a vw boxer flat four or a big V8 turning the wheels ?
If the Allens are here they’re certainly not letting us in on their secrets relating to space travel .
Only the Lord can transcend planets . With the infinite stars there are even more infinite planets . It doesn’t end it just goes on . We can create gadgets but not life without His ingredients . It’s all a big mystery but big bangs are not the answers we are looking for . If He wants us to be the Robinson family , He is the only One that can enable us , without the necessity of nuclear explosions .
56… Can we please do without the christian evangelism? It is insulting to those of us whose brain continues to function more or less logically and with due regard for evidence..
Ned, I expect your comment about your Commodore 64 is a reference to the limited computer power that was available back then. Here’s a hint, take a look at all the people sitting behind consoles in Mission Control. There are a huge number of highly qualified physicists, scientists, engineers, technicians, etc. all monitoring various inputs from a multiplicity of sensors – THAT is the weight of computational/brain power that is controlling the flight.
Terry,
One day, if I can arrange it, we shall have a morning tea with G5.
Even you, I suggest, will be over the moon with information.
And as a past colleague, you would appreciate that I do not bullshit. It would be unethical.
And it would destroy your credibility. The old saying ‘If a man will lie to you once, he’d lie to you twice’.
There’s a jury instruction somewhat along the same lines…
Dear oh dear; ‘destroying credibility’!
Long bow.
We have been trained to listen to liars and discern credibility.
Pre-judgement is for those with the arse out of their pants sleeping on Hyde Park benches.
Towards the end, I no longer wanted to cross-examine a lying POS. I just wanted to take a bull-whip to them. 10 lashes now, if you lie again it will be doubled to 20, lie again and it will be doubled to 40, if they died, well, the Court no longer had to listen to a bunch of lies, so it obviously worked.
Terry, an important bit of AGC trivia. Mission control had the ability to control the AGC via telemetry if necessary. Looking at the code, they could even take the AGC almost completely “out of the loop” and use Earth-bound computations, delivered via telemetry, to schedule, parameterize, and execute critical burns. This means that the spacecraft could be “driven” without the human inhabitants intervention, assuming they could be persuaded not to intervene. Cue the X-files music…new theory. The whole mission was flown un-manned.
Actually partly true. Early AGC instances in both CSM and LM were flown from the ground in early Apollo unmanned missions to test the components before the whole system was declared “man-rated”.
I for one, would LOVE to pick G5’s brains on some topics he hasn’t mentioned, but which I’m sure he has an opinion on. So much so that I would SHOUT morning-tea for up to 8 souls at the Hydro!
In 2015 I attended a Survivorship Conference in Oaklands California.There was only one other participant from Australia she only attended for one day, she had given Testimony on Neil Bricks S.M.A.R.T web site (Stop Mind Control and Ritual Abuse Today) a few years before.
I was attending because I wanted to meet Alison Miller, a key note speaker and author of “Healing the Unimaginable. Treating Ritual Abuse and Mind Control.” I pay tribute to her work.
At this conference I was educated about many things, although I knew some things that were not known or understood by those present, due to my UK/Australian experience. Tavistock Institute/Tavistock Nodes, Rawling Rees, the Psychological Warfare Department, OSS, Unilevers was not in the survivors or therapists frame of experience. Rather the Nazi Experiments, CIA/ MKULTRA Projects, Operation Bluebird, Monarch programming, Mengele and Ewen Cameron’s Mind Control Experiments was where the expertise was share. It was here I learnt of the Montaulk Project from several survivors, and it correlated with my experience in UK and right now in Australia. I am currently watching SBS speak of Moon Landing Honey Suckle Creek specially set up by NASA–Mission Apollo “would have been deaf dumb and blind” without Honey Suckle Creek.
UNEXPLAINED MYSTERIES
The Montauk Project Time Travel Experiments Mystery
September 2, 2018 | A Strange Mystery | Time Travel
A couple of links re my post above -there are many more.
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/montauk.html
https://www.matrixdisclosure.com/montauk-project-philadelphia-experiment/
https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2019/07/18/how-stanley-kubrick-staged-the-moon-landing-and-other-stories/
Yes, Stanley Kubrick was responsible for the fake moonlandings, but the funny part of it all was that it bacame real expensive because Kubrick insisted on filming on location.
Just kidding…
America in decline – https://summit.news/2019/07/19/survey-number-one-career-choice-for-american-kids-is-to-be-youtubers-for-chinese-kids-its-an-astronaut/
Dee, Rich Cohen, the author of the Kubrick article, doesn’t appear to claim the US never went to the moon in his writing. I’d love to find a living scientist or engineer, who can discuss technical details, and who doesn’t think we ever went. Kaysing wasn’t an engineer or scientist.
Ah what to say prophecies, conspiracies, realities.
Bob Dylan A Hard Rain’s A Gonna Fall
All the worlds a stage.
And here is the theatre–the message to the world-watch the audience
You guys are smarter than the best-and-brightest 400,000 odd 1960’s vintage engineers and craftsmen who thought they were building an epic space-faring system. Congratulations!
Many of them have passed-away, and not one death-bed confession. They must’ve been absolutely fooled, or cowed in some way from spilling the beans. I’ve even talked to a few of them who are still with us. Congrats on being more “in the know” than all those poor experts!
Even countries who are not pals of the US (but can go to the moon) are happy to admit the US did it several times. I wonder what we’re threatening them with if they don’t “play along”?
I find it pretty amazing that I can run an AGC emulator, open-source, with the flown-code for the CSM and LEM for various missions, and that it actually works in a “hard physics” orbital simulator.
The thing really only calculated burns most of the time. The realtime stuff for the LM is for landing on the moon, and the realtime stuff for the CM is mostly about re-entry control.
A hoax so thorough that individual parts like the flown code, and the space-suits, heat-shields (similar technology used to this day) and the follow-on projects building on Apollo, like the Shuttle and Skylab, also worked as intended, is a masterful hoax indeed!
Even the Soviets bought it, and cancelled further attempts to send people to the moon.
Yeah, the ‘Moon hoax’, right up there with ‘no plane hit the Pentagon’ or ‘global warming’. The Western education system is devolving so fast that a large percentage of the population believes the ‘Earth is flat’.
Anybody know how many genders there are this week, 32?, 64?, 128?
I just found this:
That’s one small step for a non-gender-specific person, one giant leap for all people , especially those oppressed by CIS-gendered straight while males.
1/3 is distracting the second-third with implausible conspiracy-theories, and the third-third is watching cat videos. The percentage that is actually paying attention to significant events is very very small.
You can still find good design drawings and schematics of the Saturn V rocket – those engineers should be congratulated. But there are papers on the actual lunar module flight paths and computer algorithms that would be classed as literary nonsense genre as they contain falsified equations, algebra and flow charts. You only need to try and reproduce the paper yourself and the house of cards suddenly collapses, the curtain gets pulled back by Toto exposing the old man behind the magical machine. So fakery is hidden within truth to those with untrained eyes. Any computer scientist or mathematician would stumble when you combine vectors and scalars in the same formula with lots of variables and indices that have not been defined elsewhere in the paper – only to discover that they have been randomly written on the page to make it look like real mathematics.
Neither argument has any real bearing on the overarching intention, i.e. be-fooling the World re U. S. invincibility. I mean by 1969 the game was well and truly over.
How’s bout we start with something very simple. Given the published thrust of the APS engine, and the setup of the LM ascent stage, and the respective densities of equal volumes of Aerozine-50 and N2O4 and the moment-arms of those two spherical tanks, give a rough estimate of just the “left-right” torque just at the moment of liftoff.
So this would be with full-tanks, with the thrust from the main engine acting on the center of mass of the LM ascent stage.
What would be the torque assuming nothing else changed, when half the volume of the two fuel components were burned?
Joe , why haven’t the powers that be gone there for 47 years ?
Space travel requires astronauts wearing nappies . Until we jump that hurdle we are here on this earthly paradise – the garden . Anyway , what’s the point of travelling to other planets unless we master the speed of light .
Which powers that be what? Countries have gone there within the past 47 years. I guess those cat videos must be pretty distracting, eh? Distracting enough to stop you inventing FTL travel?
Nappies? Just a test to see how badly you want to be an astronaut, is all.
“why haven’t the powers that be gone there for 47 years ?” – there’s more interest in cat videos…