re: NASA chief says if China beats us to moon "I'll be fired".

quote:

---

not believing in the 1969 moon landing is ignorant

---

How can anyone not believe?

LINK

quote:

---

View of Apollo 14 Lunar Module on the Moon
NASA ID: as14-66-09277
AS14-66-9277 (5 Feb. 1971) --- An excellent view of the Apollo 14 Lunar Module (LM) on the moon, as photographed during the first Apollo 14 extravehicular activity (EVA) on the lunar surface. The astronauts have already deployed the U.S. flag. Note the laser ranging retro reflector (LR-3) at the foot of the LM ladder. The LR-3 was deployed later. While astronauts Alan B. Shepard Jr., commander, and Edgar D. Mitchell, lunar module pilot, descended in the LM to explore the moon, astronaut Stuart A. Roosa, command module pilot, remained with the Command and Service Modules (CSM) in lunar orbit.
Date Created:1971-02-05

---

LINK

quote:

---

believing man walked on the moon in the 60’s is an adult version of believing in Santa Claus.

---

Equally implausible would be keeping all those thousands of people involved in a “hoax” landing silent all these years. Think of all the opportunities for deathbed confessions, book and movie deals, from those NASA astronauts, engineers, and Hollywood special effects experts, yet nobody ever said a thing.

I'm officially on board with the people who should be ridiculed aren't the deniers, but instead those mocking them

The 2nd group is so gullible they not only blindly accept it as fact, but are so confident they're willing attack the sheer existence of any skepticism regarding the event

Can we just talk about the logistics of actually going to the moon and back for a second?

Let's assume it is/was even possible to accurately measure the gravitational/thermal/atmospheric variations to be encountered on such a mission, and that human engineering was capable of designing a manned-rocketship that could maintain operational integrity across these extremes in the 1960's, that still leaves

1. Achieve and sustain an exit velo of 25,000 MPH in order to escape earth

2. Travel 240,000 miles @ ~17,500 MPH navigating a myriad of environmental variables outside of human-planning/control

3. Decelerate to safely enter lunar orbit and rotate for 2.5 days

4. Eject the lunar module and descend ~385,000 feet, safely landing on the surface using only thrusting to offset gravitational acceleration in this***



***Unlike earth, the moon has no atmosphere and thus no terminal velocity. An object free falling from that height would be traveling >2,000 MPH when it impacted the surface

5. Launch from the moon's surface at ~3,600 MPH and ascend ~75 miles to safely dock with the Columbia, which is orbiting at >3,000 MPH btw, in this



6. Orient the CSM back towards earth and despite requiring a propulsion system from a stationary start like this to get to the moon...



7. Exit the moon's gravitational pull, at ~5,000 MPH, mid-orbit using only this



8. Travel ~25,000 miles to reach the point where earth's gravitational pull takes over

9. Detach from the Service/Propulsion system ~3,000 miles from the surface

10. Despite requiring a litany of monumental technological leaps to pull off such a mission to this point, use fricking parachutes to land in the ocean



Not only was this pulled off, it was done on the very first attempt without reliable QA/training exercises as recreating the conditions to scale on earth are impractical/impossible. We also had video feed despite a fricking scattered thunderstorm decimating modern satellite feeds

And then we somehow managed to this lose all this technology, never even thinking to implement it into the military/civil industries. 60 years later, nothing compares aeronautically to what was supposedly achieved in 1969. Nothing has VTOL capabilities close to that of the Lunar Module. No aircraft has close to that level of structural integrity. And no weapons system has close to that max velo/operational range/adaptability

Sidenote: why does apollo 11 look near identical to that era's ICBMs?



This isn't anti-american, this isn't anti-government, and isn't even conspiracy theorist. Regardless of what Apollo 11 actually did/did not accomplish, using simple logic and reason, the United States claiming to not only have gone to the moon, but come back in 1969 might be the most dubious claim any organized government has ever attempted to perpetuate

Even if it did happen, you're an absolute fool to have no skepticism without first hand, indisputable evidence. And that really only applies to the 2 that supposedly touched down, even Collins should have had his doubts

quote:

---

How can anyone not believe?

---

Aluminum foil, paper mache, pvc, and cardboard. Yea, we went to the moon in that.

quote:

---

Because spacex is trying to figure out how to do this profitably, which is a huge parameter restriction vs the 60s.

---

Still doesnt make up for the incredible differences in todays technology

quote:

---

early 70s era tech

---

Have you checked out the 70s era tech in the official NASA photos above?

So what you see in those pictures looks perfectly fine, no issues with anything?

quote:

---

So what you see in those pictures looks perfectly fine, no issues with anything?

---

No, what jumps out at you?

I’ve seen the tooling for the space shuttle, some of which was modified from Saturn V equipment, as well as the tooling used to build the SLS. It involves welding large tubes and domes for pressure vessels. The old method was fusion welding, but now we use stir welding, which greatly changed the tooling since the loads from the weld head are much higher compared to a torch melting parent and filler material.

The SLS is built with far fewer people and a much smaller budget, using multiple separate builders to complete the mission. The first SLS flew around the moon—something Apollo never did. We have so many complete Saturn Vs still on static view because they were exhaustively tested to ensure they could perform. The SLS succeeded on the first try thanks to better technology and achieving more with less.

If I were building a car to travel the world, I wouldn’t copy a 1962 Impala; I’d design something more comfortable, safe, and technologically advanced. Ok, they used 1970s engines, which are still near optimal for power efficiency and safety, and were destined for the scrap bin, saving an enormous amount of cost. Chemical propulsion has its limits, and we were/are nearing the end of what it could deliver.

I can’t understand those who think this was faked. I’ve witnessed some of the immense resources and craftsmanship involved in building Saturn V motors and seen bits of leftover tooling. The test stands at Stennis are like monuments to human engineering. There’s plenty to doubt in this world, but the Saturn program and moon landings aren’t among them.