It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

An End To The Moon Conspiracy!

page: 152
29
<< 149  150  151    153  154  155 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter
...
Permanently affix a stick to the bottom of a glass and hold the stick. No problem.
...


What are you saying? That God put his hand under Snoopy and made it to touch the ground softly?

Why did NASA build Langley Crane in 1963-64?




jra

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by _bigbrain_
Why did NASA build Langley Crane in 1963-64?


It was called the Lunar Landing Research Facility (LLRF) and they built it for simulations of Moon landings. These days it's called the Impact Dynamics Research Facility and it's used for aircraft crash tests.



posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
...
It was called the Lunar Landing Research Facility (LLRF) and they built it for simulations of Moon landings. These days it's called the Impact Dynamics Research Facility and it's used for aircraft crash tests.


No, you have not understood.

Why did NASA build that biggest crane?


jra

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by _bigbrain_
No, you have not understood.


What did I not understand?


Why did NASA build that biggest crane?


To train astronauts on simulated lunar landings...



posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
...

To train astronauts on simulated lunar landings...



There is no video, there is no picture that shows astronauts inside Snoopy that simulate to land going backwards.



posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 04:56 PM
link   
_bigbarin_,

If it is your assertion that landers cannot land "going backwards," then do you suggest that every robotic lunar lander, every Mars lander, and every Venus lander is a hoax? Because there have been robotic landers on all three of those celestial bodies that have landed "going backwards."


jra

posted on Mar, 15 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by _bigbrain_
There is no video, there is no picture that shows astronauts inside Snoopy that simulate to land going backwards.


Well of course there isn't. "Snoopy" was the name for the Apollo 10 LM. It was never suspended by that crane.

What they did suspend from it was a small, one manned, LM-like lander. There are many photos of it out there. I personally haven't seen any footage of it in action, but I'm sure there is some out there.



posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by nataylor
...
do you suggest that every robotic lunar lander, every Mars lander, and every Venus lander is a hoax?
...


Yes, they all are a hoax like it's a hoax Tempel 1 hit in the right eye:

www.nasa.gov...


Originally posted by jra
...
"Snoopy" was the name for the Apollo 10 LM. It was never suspended by that crane.
What they did suspend from it was a small, one manned, LM-like lander.
...


Are you talking about this strange space toy for children?




Let us see it while flying, please.



posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by _bigbrain_
Are you talking about this strange space toy for children?



Let us see it while flying, please.


I don't have a video of that one flying, but here is another test of the LLRV (Lunar Lander Reseach Vehicle), which was built to provide an early "Proof Of Concept" for the LEM's which were designed later. This proves that something like the Lunar Module CAN land going backwards.




Originally posted by _bigbrain_
Yes, they all are a hoax like it's a hoax Tempel 1 hit in the right eye:

www.nasa.gov...

I don't understand what you're getting at...what evidence do you have that the Deep Impact mission to comet Tempel 1 was a hoax (and don't bring up that stupid idea that the comet looks like an animal's face -- we've been through that many times before.)


[edit on 3/16/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]



posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
...
I don't have a video of that one flying, but here is another test of the LLRV
...


LLRV flying is a hoax too and it didn't fly suspended by that biggest crane.

Why did NASA build Langley crane? To test lunar landers, but no lander was able to land going backwards.


jra

posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by _bigbrain_
Why did NASA build Langley crane? To test lunar landers, but no lander was able to land going backwards.


No it wasn't. It was a simulator built to train the astronauts. It was not made to test the LM itself. The vehicle they used in the Lunar Landing Research Facility was just a mock LM. As in, not real. Again, to emphasize, it was just a simulator for the astronauts themselves. It was the only way they could train in a simulated 1/6th gravity on Earth.



posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by _bigbrain_
LLRV flying is a hoax too and it didn't fly suspended by that biggest crane.

So what if the LLRV didn't fly while attached to the gantry at Langley? What's your point?

The LLRV worked landing backwards without being suspended by wires, and you have no evidence whatsoever that the LLRV and the later LLTV were hoaxes, however you keep calling tham hoaxes. Many witnesses including the independent media saw the LLRV and LLTV operate in person.

Just becasue you repeatedly call something a hoax -- without any other evidence to back up your claim -- does not make it a hoax. I think tomorrow I will make the claim that today's sunrise was a hoax. My claim of that being a hoax will be backed up by the same amount of evidence you have regarding the LLRV and LLTV.

...and as jra and others have pointed out time after time on this thread, that gantry at Langley was only one tool they used to train the astronauts in simulated 1/6 gravity (lower gravity simulated by wires and pulleys). Although I read somewhere that the astronauts later admitted that Langley was a great simulation, but it was the best they had at the time.



posted on Mar, 16 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by _bigbrain_
Are you talking about this strange space toy for children?




Let us see it while flying, please.



that is simulator , it was designed to be used suspeneded from the cable - the opertator actions were translated to winch pay-out speed and crane beam movements

the reason for building it was that it was cheaper , safer and more productive than a flying jet engine powered version

your silly demand to " see it flying " is akin to asking to see a pic of this :



flying - thats how daft your demand is



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by _bigbrain_

Originally posted by nataylor
...
do you suggest that every robotic lunar lander, every Mars lander, and every Venus lander is a hoax?
...


Yes, they all are a hoax like it's a hoax Tempel 1 hit in the right eye:

If the Tempel 1 was such a hoax, as with every unmanned probe, then why were independent amateur astronomers able to witness and record the impact with their telescopes?



And how was it that the lick observatory was able to observe Apollo 8 inbound from the moon after they successfully orbited it, a feat requiring them to fire their main SPS engine while "flying backwards" for a couple minutes?




posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra
...
No it wasn't. It was a simulator built to train the astronauts. It was not made to test the LM itself. The vehicle they used in the Lunar Landing Research Facility was just a mock LM.
...


What can you simulate with a mock LM suspended to that biggest crane?

You are held by cables. I also can pilot a mock LM suspended to the crane.

You can't test if LM is able to keep vertical position and land going backwards.

Which capabilities can you learn held by cables?

It's ludicrous what you are saying.

Suspended to the crane also children can play at being astronauts.

It doesn't seem to me this is a mock lander:



It is instead simply a real lander that can't land going backwards.

[edit on 17-3-2008 by _bigbrain_]



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by _bigbrain_
I also can pilot a mock LM suspended to the crane.


I doubt that, somehow, unless you get lots of flying experience beforehand. How was you first time on a flight simulator set to realistic level?


It is instead simply a lander that can't land going backwards.


If you say it can't, it doesn't mean much.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 02:35 PM
link   
I didn't read much of this thread, but just wanted to note - the flag was waving. Without going into the vast array of other obvious discrepancies, is that not the end of the discussion?

Unless someone believes there is a conspiracy to make us believe their is no air on the moon...



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Wilsonfrisk
 


Find one video of the flag waving where it is not being touched by an astronaut. There aren't any.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by nataylor
 


We've all seen the footage. It obviously wasn't filmed outside, so know, it isn't "blowing in the wind". However, for it to wave when the astronaut was touching it, there would have to be an atmosphere. things don't move around like that in a vacuum. That is physics.



posted on Mar, 17 2008 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Or.......wait for it..........a metal pole running through the flag to keep it extended so that it wouldn't instantly fall and be unrecognizable. Said pole also would be waving back and forth after they hammered the flag into the ground in reaction to the beating that the whole flag just took.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 149  150  151    153  154  155 >>

log in

join