We Probably Never Made it to the Moon

Here is proof...

Japan, India and I think China have radio mapped the lunar surface. The picture below is one with our astronauts on the moon the other is the Japan radio map of the same area. If you look off in the distance they are both the same. It would be pretty hard to fake something like the horizon when you don't even know what the horizon will be 50+ years in the past.

originally posted by: TamtammyMacx
I read one time that though the command module was changed from a pure oxygen environment, that the LEM was not. It was even launched from Earth on the Saturn 5 with pure oxygen. It would have made it problematic on the lunar surface with all the static electricity on the moon.

Both CM and LM operated a pure oxygen environment, which allowed them to use lower pressures than if they used a normal air mix. For safety reasons the CM was launched with normal air, which was gradually bled out as they ascended and replaced with pure oxygen. The cases you see them carryng out to the launchpad contain pure oxygen, which they used to allow any nitrogen in the bloodstream to dissipate. The LM is depressurised each time the astronauts leave - it's not an issue. They can generate static electricity as they move around, but the LM oxygen is gone by then.

a reply to: Zaphod58
the OP of this thread mentions some info about the Van Allen Belts..The Van Allen Belts are about 3,400 miles high above earth's surface..It would be no easy task to make it through the Van Allen Belts. The Van Allen Belts range from temperatures of 2,000-20,000 degrees Celsius. That's as much as 4x hotter than the surface of the sun. I really didnt say anything about reentering the atmosphere which I understand the friction involved based on speed angle and the density of the air.the only thing i can not say is if this is actually true about this van allen belt and its temp.I was just quoting from the info that was posted...

a reply to: andy06shake
if u read the first post it says : The Van Allen Belts are about 3,400 miles high above earth's surface.The Van Allen Belts range from temperatures of 2,000-20,000 degrees Celsius. That's as much as 4x hotter than the surface of the sun.that's how
I was only quoting what i read from the OP, i can not say that i know anything about this Van Allen Belt , but if this is true then this answers the question about going anywhere past it.. i dont think there is any material that will withstand 20,000 deg around here. maybe tantalum carbide said to stand up to 4000 deg f

a reply to: dunn00

Satellites survive in the Van Allen Belts for years, with few problems. Temperature at that distance is misleading, because there’s no medium to really heat up, like in the deeper part of the atmosphere. The atmosphere technically extends over 6,000 miles, but it’s so thin well before that, that heat transfer isn’t as straightforward as the temperature is X.

a reply to: dunn00

www.space.com...

agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

Everything we know about the VAB is because space craft have been through them. It is obvioulsy therefore possible for spacecraft to get through them.

Individfual atoms may indeed get very hot. Those atoms are very far apart.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

and u know this how? i was just quoting the OP first post here where he says :The Van Allen Belts are about 3,400 miles high above earth's surface. The Van Allen Belts range from temperatures of 2,000-20,000 degrees Celsius. That's as much as 4x hotter than the surface of the sun. so if this is true then how did we go to the moon ? when there's nothing that can withstand that temp around here ? if its not true then the sky's the limit right

a reply to: TamtammyMacx

The original Apollo cabin atmosphere was pure O2 - to keep moisture and dust out and to seal the early design hatch required O2 at pressure above sea level pressure, 16.7 psi

This lead to the disastrous fire in Apollo 1 in January 1967

The cabin atmosphere at launch was changed to 60-40 Nitrogen/Oxygen The cabin was purged after reaching orbit and replaced with O2 at lower pressure, 5 psi

The LEM atmosphere was always using O2 at the low pressure

a reply to: dunn00

There's not enough gas molecules to transfer heat to the materials. The thermosphere is a very low density gas. Temperature is a measure of how much energy individual particles have.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

ok then if we have been through this then i guess i will ask the OP why he only posted about the temps and not about traveling thru it already with success . i was quoting what i read and didn't research it any further. so now i probably will and will learn something new which is always a good thing

a reply to: BigfootNZ

Coup[e of years ago, Rocketdyne, builder of the SATURN V F1 engines did a redesign of the engine, simplify it and using modern materials and construction methods

The original F1 were custom built by hand and all the people who knew how to do it are dead and the methodology lost

The new resigned F1 . known as F1B , using 1/3 the parts and while losing a few second of ISP was just as powerful

The F-1B engine has a design goal to be at least as powerful as the unflown F-1A, while also being more cost effective. The design incorporates a greatly simplified combustion chamber, a reduced number of engine parts, and the removal of the F-1 exhaust recycling system, including the turbine exhaust mid-nozzle and the "curtain" cooling manifold, with the turbine exhaust having a separate outlet passage beside the shortened main nozzle on the F-1B. The reduction in parts costs is aided by using selective laser melting in the production of some metallic parts. The resulting F-1B engine is intended to produce 1,800,000 lbf (8.0 MN) of thrust at sea level, a 15% increase over the approximate 1,550,000 lbf (6.9 MN) of thrust that the mature Apollo 15 F-1 engines produced.

a reply to: Grenade

yeah im learning that i should not quote the OP of the thread until i realize that some of the info was left out about this ...apparently

a reply to: Zaphod58
thanks... im learning !!

originally posted by: dunn00
a reply to: Grenade

yeah im learning that i should not quote the OP of the thread until i realize that some of the info was left out about this ...apparently

I was initially led to investigate it after seeing this interview with a NASA engineer:

"radiation like this can harm the guidance system..shielding will be put to the test as the vehicle goes through the radiation.. sensors aboard will detect radiation from this region for scientists to study.. we must solve this problem before we send people through this region of space" (starts at 3:00 in the video below)



So if they're talking about the difficulties of this region, then I think it is a difficulty. He even specifically says "we must solve this problem before we send people through this region of space". There's so many mixed messages it's hard to get a consistent answer

There's other admissions of the difficulties of the Van Allen Belts but I'm not at my laptop at the moment. I'll find more soon

reply to: cooperton

And he is specifically referring to the guidance and electronics of the Orion craft. It is not a catch apply to everything deal. Apollo's electronic system was far more rudimentary and there was less of it. The early work on the VAB was done by space craft. Space craft can, ipso facto, function when going through them.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: cooperton

How did we (and the Russians) leave stuff there, then?

Stuff like the five laser retroreflectors that we can now shine lasers off, and get very accurate distance measurements with?

Lunar Laser Ranging experiment From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unmanned mission to moon ?

a reply to: Grenade

Ok, here is a question for you. If we faked the moon landings, why did the Russians, who happened to be engaged in a very competitive race to the moon with us at the time, and were capable of monitoring our telemetry, not say a word about a faked mission? If there was no downlink of communication from the moons surface to the Earth, the Soviets would have noticed that and I am sure they would have exposed it.

a reply to: openminded2011

When did i say we faked the moon landings? I questioned some of the evidence, not the event.

Also, if the Russians had questioned the legitimacy of the landings, do you think the press in the West would have reported it?

My 2 cents that’s worth about that, I’d suspect we 100% did go to the moon. If we didn’t, the Russians would have called that out almost certainly.

I suspect the moon landing happened to served three purposes:

- distract/unite the country against the backdrop of the Vietnam war.
- Get the Russians to spend money they don’t have/bankrupt them.
- Satisfy curiosities we had based on what we learned from the German’s post WW2.

From objectives like those, you get a bunch of potential downstream wins, too.

So we did go to the moon, we did spend all that money, etc.from my perspective.

The big question in my mind is what did we really find “up there” and how did we “lose the ability” to return there.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: openminded2011

When did i say we faked the moon landings? I questioned some of the evidence, not the event.

Also, if the Russians had questioned the legitimacy of the landings, do you think the press in the West would have reported it?

The western press was not as compromised back then. Also if Russia had questioned it, It would have been all over the world news outlets, not just the western ones.