The Russians never duplicated Apollo 8

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

I've already explained why it can't exist.

Perhaps ypu can explain how a satellite just happened to photograph an event that occurred in an instant but was mot known about in advance.

We have before, we have after. An inage of 'at the tome' is virtually impossible.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
Post-addendum: Will we ever know why the Russians stayed below the glass ceiling of 475km?

Because, since they couldn't go to the Moon (or beyond), there was little to no benefit to sending men higher than LEO? Spaceflight isn't high jumping.

The news clippings are real history

Sorry, no. Especially not during the cold war. News clippings could full just as much of propaganda and speculation as facts. Putting trurtles on Zond 5 is not the same as sending men up there and returning them safely.

the real question should be "would the U.S. have continued if Russia had made the feat first"

originally posted by: wildespace

The news clippings are real history

Sorry, no. Especially not during the cold war. News clippings could full just as much of propaganda and speculation as facts. Putting trurtles on Zond 5 is not the same as sending men up there and returning them safely.

News clippings are real history. You have been spending too much time in the NASA gift shop.


Courtesy thumb for larger version

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

News clippings are real history.

ooops your hypocricy is showing

you hand wave away all the real history news clippings of the Apollo program

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

News clippings are real history.

ooops your hypocricy is showing

you hand wave away all the real history news clippings of the Apollo program

Does it really rise to the level of hypocrisy? Which version of history do you support? The BBC video or the CIA video from 1981 or the news clips which tell a totally different story? Be careful what you say. History is a battleground, do you want to be cannon fodder?

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter
What he is saying is that you can't present news clippings about Zond as 100% fact and not also accept news clippings about Apollo. You don't get to cherry pick like that.

And yes, of course the Zond missions were dry runs for manned missions. Who denied that? But they couldn't have landed a man on the moon, or even put a man into lunar orbit, using the same rocket they used to send turtles AROUND the moon.

a reply to: Rob48

That's the crux of it. No one is saying the Soviets didn't want to send men to (or around) the Moon. They just didn't get the chance.

I see another kind of dissonance here. SJ implies that no one ever went to the Moon due to the allegedly deadly effects of Van Allen Belts. And yet he presents press clipping of the Soviets striving to go to the Moon, citing the success of the Zonds.

So what is it? Did the Americans go to the Moon, with Soviets trying to catch up with them? Or did nobody go to the moon, and the whole discussion here is moot? *confused*

a reply to: wildespace

*confused*

*META* The thread has quieted down, the participants have had time to reflect on it and maybe re-read it. The thread only becomes confusing when we are tempted to argue about the implications of the 475km Russian Glass Ceiling, rather than stay focussed on the historical source materials. When I say "we are tempted" I am including myself because ... I am guilty, in that, I indulged in arguing the implications in this thread.

I see another kind of dissonance here. SJ implies that no one ever went to the Moon due to the allegedly deadly effects of Van Allen Belts. And yet he presents press clipping of the Soviets striving to go to the Moon, citing the success of the Zonds.

By focussing on my "implications" you are effectively bringing further *confusion* into the thread. I hope that you do understand that after 23 pages?

Was my OP so badly constructed? Did I do a bad job of guiding the discussion? These are the historical facts:

1. The Russians never duplicated Apollo 8, Christmas Eve, Howard Hughes Birthday. en.wikipedia.org...

2. The Russians never went beyond 475km in space altitude which they recorded on March, 1965, nearly 50 years ago!
3. The N-1 was not required to duplicate Apollo 8, sorry Phage.
4. Western experts speculated that Zond manned lunar missions were imminent in the months before Apollo 8.
5. December 19, 1972 is a very important date. It was the last time a human being was above 475km in space altitude. That is the splashdown date for Apollo 17.

As you can see wildespace, this is not a moon landing hoax thread... this is a research thread (in disguise).

originally posted by: Rob48
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter
What he is saying is that you can't present news clippings about Zond as 100% fact and not also accept news clippings about Apollo. You don't get to cherry pick like that.

And yes, of course the Zond missions were dry runs for manned missions. Who denied that? But they couldn't have landed a man on the moon, or even put a man into lunar orbit, using the same rocket they used to send turtles AROUND the moon.

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
3. The N-1 was not required to duplicate Apollo 8, sorry Phage.

this is a research thread (in disguise).

if this is a research thread.. and you believe the russians did not need the N1 rockets to duplicate apollo 8, then you should have proof that the proton rocket was capable of entering lunar orbit?

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
3. The N-1 was not required to duplicate Apollo 8, sorry Phage.

this is a research thread (in disguise).

if this is a research thread.. and you believe the russians did not need the N1 rockets to duplicate apollo 8, then you should have proof that the proton rocket was capable of entering lunar orbit?

The Russians have Glass Ceiling in space, choos. It's at 475 km.

a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

No, they don't. That they have not gone higher is no evidence that they can't go higher, any more than my never having been to Wisconsin is any proof that I can't go to Wisconsin.

In fact, the same company that has flown seven private citizens to the ISS also offers circum-lunar flight to paying individuals. Why don't you ask them if there's a "glass ceiling"?

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter
3. The N-1 was not required to duplicate Apollo 8, sorry Phage.

this is a research thread (in disguise).

if this is a research thread.. and you believe the russians did not need the N1 rockets to duplicate apollo 8, then you should have proof that the proton rocket was capable of entering lunar orbit?

The Russians have Glass Ceiling in space, choos. It's at 475 km.

you claimed the russians didnt need the N1 rocket to duplicate apollo 8.. you wrote it as a fact.. im asking where you found this fact? nothing about this glass ceiling, sayonara.

if this is the research thread you claim it to be, then you should have no issues proving your claim the N1 rocket was not needed to duplicate apollo 8.

originally posted by: Saint Exupery
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

In fact, the same company that has flown seven private citizens to the ISS also offers circum-lunar flight to paying individuals. Why don't you ask them if there's a "glass ceiling"?

Well that ought to shut a few blowhards up. *snip*

This thread is in a total breakdown, as practically all of the questions (or points) from SJ have been addressed, time and again, but he is not listening.

1. The Russians never duplicated Apollo 8 - understandable, since they didn't have a reliable rocket that could have taken men to the Moon and return them safely back.

2. The Russians never went beyond 475km in space altitude which they recorded on March, 1965, nearly 50 years ago! - understandable, since without actually going for the Moon or beyond, there is little to no point to getting higher and higher above LEO.

3. The N-1 was not required to duplicate Apollo 8, sorry Phage. - Agreed, but the Proton wasn't reliable enough for manned missions.

4. Western experts speculated that Zond manned lunar missions were imminent in the months before Apollo 8. - Good on them for being optimistic. The reality was a lot more sobering.

5. December 19, 1972 is a very important date. It was the last time a human being was above 475km in space altitude. That is the splashdown date for Apollo 17. - And that will soon be recreated when the Orion spacecraft takes men to the Moon again.

originally posted by: Saint Exupery
a reply to: SayonaraJupiter

No, they don't. That they have not gone higher is no evidence that they can't go higher, any more than my never having been to Wisconsin is any proof that I can't go to Wisconsin.

In fact, the same company that has flown seven private citizens to the ISS also offers circum-lunar flight to paying individuals. Why don't you ask them if there's a "glass ceiling"?

How will these greedy capitalists get people to the moon? "Using flight proven Russian spacecraft..."

Using flight proven Russian spacecraft we will fly two private citizens and one professional cosmonaut on a free return trajectory around the far side of the moon. They will come within 100km of the Moon’s surface. If you chose to join this mission you will see the illuminated far-side of the Moon, and then witness the amazing sight of the Earth rising above the surface of the Moon. We expect our first mission to launch by 2017.

Your source uses forward looking statements.

I watched the video. It's quite the p.r. piece.

CEO Eric Anderson said "The greatest spacecraft in the history of manned spaceflight ..... is the Soyuz. This spacecraft will take you to within a hundred kilometers of the moon's surface."

It seems that CEO Eric Anderson agrees with me.... a heavy lift booster rocket (SaturnV or N-1) is not and has never been required for a lunar mission, free return, but still a manned lunar mission. How odd is that? It's the same mission that Wernher von Braun proposed and the ESA planned one like this, too ... remember when we were talking about low earth orbit assembly in this thread? Some people scoffed who are considered 'space experts' scoffed at me and said heavy lift was required.

Forward looking statements aside that was a pretty interesting video. I did not know western capitalists were selling tickets to the Moon on Russian Soyuz. I'm glad you posted that.

originally posted by: choos
if this is a research thread.. and you believe the russians did not need the N1 rockets to duplicate apollo 8, then you should have proof that the proton rocket was capable of entering lunar orbit?

The Russians have Glass Ceiling in space, choos. It's at 475 km.

Here's my source:

CEO Eric Anderson said "The greatest spacecraft in the history of manned spaceflight ..... is the Soyuz."

originally posted by: SayonaraJupiter

originally posted by: choos
if this is a research thread.. and you believe the russians did not need the N1 rockets to duplicate apollo 8, then you should have proof that the proton rocket was capable of entering lunar orbit?

The Russians have Glass Ceiling in space, choos. It's at 475 km.

Here's my source:

CEO Eric Anderson said "The greatest spacecraft in the history of manned spaceflight ..... is the Soyuz."

*slow clap*

again with the glass ceiling that im not refering to, it doesnt even answer my question.. how is that proof of your "fact" that the N1 was not required to enter lunar orbit?

now what about the other part of my question?? how do you propose the zond missions to enter and leave lunar orbit without the N1 rocket? wheres your proof of this "fact"??

apollo 8 entered and left lunar orbit, if you want to present that the N1 rocket was not required to duplicate apollo 8 as fact, you need to prove they had rockets capable of entering and leaving lunar orbit that wasnt the N1 rocket.