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.

 

Why didn't the USSR fake a moon landing?

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   
One motive given for the USA to have faked one if not all of the moon landings was to "beat" the USSR in the Space Race. The USSR had the same, if not greater, capability to carry out such a massive deception on the people. Why didn't they fake a landing?




posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 01:33 PM
link   
They probably figured that either it was a fake landing that everybody believed, or it was a real landing. Either way, they would have been second, the mission would have helped not a jot in any military advantage, and the money was better spent on doing something else first.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
A question I have always had is;

If the US faked a moon landing, why didnt all the competing countries "out" us?

Surely they had the technology, (telescopes) to be able to discern whether or not we are actually sending something to the moon? What would their motive be for allowing the US to appear to be technologically superior to them in their own peoples eyes and in the eyes of the rest of the world?

That question has always been the thing that has prevented me from believing the moon landing was a hoax.

I can see why our government might want to perpetuate such a hoax, and I can see that they COULD have pulled it over on us, as most of us dont have the means to check for ourselves, but on the entire world? People and scientists that have the ability to see for themselves? And who would have every motive to want to make us look bad and like liars and incompetent? It just has never made sense to me.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Phage, what a brilliant question!!

Here I sit, battling with those who are too young to have lived through the 'space age'.....and you just cut right to it!!

Fabulous.....kudos!



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by redled
 


Why would they have to have been second? They could have faked it before the USA did.

Surely they had as much if not more incentive as the USA. They were ahead during the early part of the Space Race. When the USA started catching up, a faked landing would have maintained their lead. The propaganda value would have been huge. Faking it would have been cheaper than doing it.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   
You ask a very very good question, from what I've read the USSR had a troubled space program, but it also was extremely secretive. They kept most missons a total secret until it was assured that it was completed successfully.


There's this to look at:

Soviet Moonshot (N1/L3)




Cancellation

The success of Project Apollo in putting American astronauts on the Moon in 1969 put the United States ahead in the Space race, and that was the deathblow to the Soviet moon program, although plans were drawn up until the early 1970s. Four N-1 launches were attempted but all were failures, despite engineering improvements after each crash. The second launch attempt on 3 July 1969, just 13 days prior to the launch of Apollo 11, was a catastrophic failure which destroyed both the rocket and the launch complex. Subsequently, the Soviets decided to concentrate on the development of space stations, gaining several firsts in the process, and also a long-term Mars program, which continues to the present day.





I suppose a person could argue that the USSR wanted to legitimately land on the moon, and not fake it. Then the US could find this out and decide to fake theirs to beat them to the punch. The USSR buys it and gives up and moves on to other space projects.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   
I concur with Illusionsaregrander's opinion on this one. Russia would have been the first ones to call NASA's bluff on this one if there was even a thought it were a hoax.

There were 2 groups of contractors from Australia who tracked the Apollo translunar telemetry, who stated there is no way they could have been fooled by transmission from low earth orbit.


The MSFN operators absolutely can't be fooled by a satellite. Their antennas must be precisely aimed, and a satellite doesn't follow the same path in the sky as an outbound or inbound Apollo spacecraft. They'd know. Their ability to locate the spacecraft in the sky is nothing short of legendary. They took great pride in being able to use the Doppler shift of the radio signal to determine the flight path of the spacecraft. When compared later with flight records, the MSFN ground station operators were proud to have observed motion of the spacecraft due to such subtle effects as waste dumps and sublimator operation.


Honestly, don't you think Russia wasn't tracking this telemetry as well? You can bet you rear end they were.

If there were a NASA moon hoax, one of the contractors would have stepped forward and said so. This is not the case. The people who were involved did in fact track translunar telemetry. A pretty compelling argument against a hoax theory if you ask me.

There was this article that NASA lost telemetry data tapes... well actually it was National Archives who misplaced the tapes, and perhaps not lost but National Archives stores a vast amount of data from all government agencies so not at all surprising.

What matters here is the testimony of the people who actually did the work. If it were entirely NASA it would be one thing, but there were tons of contractors involved (some from different countries) none of whom are under gag orders or non-disclosure, and none of whom are asserting the lunar landing was a hoax.

The people who are making these claims, are the ones who instigate conspiracy theory in general... and who stand to profit from it. It makes for an interesting topic to "question reality", and hey.. it's fun and easy to do.
They are the ones who have a book to sell ya, or are willing to come lecture at a seminar near you (for a small fee).

What NASA *should* have done was put a solar beacon on the moon, which transmits some kind of data, even if only a "beep beep" from the moon. I truely don't believe that NASA had a clue that the credibility of missions would be in question 30+ years after the fact.

I know this really all wasn't solicited by the OP, but the US/Russian relations as far as space exploration goes has been great for many years. It is unfortunate if the political aspects of the war diminishes these relations.

Thanks for the post....



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by mapsurfer_
 


A star, mapsurfer.....very, very well thought-out post!

I think, a new member bringing a lot into the discussion, means a lot!

Welcome!!



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Actually its quite simple, US faked the lunar landing, USSR was the only competition, they knew about it and let them do their thing saving themselves billions for trying. US saved themselves also enough money for the cold war.

This space program thing wasn't that big! Warrfare was (and stil is)!!! There is (for the time being) not enough money to earn. have anyone ever thought waht the Apollo program would have costed if everything was real?

They tossed a coin and US won as being the party to fake the landing, justifying taxpayers money spending (which really went to warfare program).

I know, i have no prove, but if I had, I wouldn't be sitting here!



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   
reply to post by saturnus1962
 


saturnus, that post was meant to be satirical, right?

I certainly hope so.

NOW, we have the possibility that certain parts of what the Astronauts saw, and photographed, because they reveal an Alien presence....and the Governments don't want this revealed.....hence, we have the 'conspiracy' theory, along with all of its disinfo.....

I've followed the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs.....no way to fake them, in my opinion.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by redled
 


Why would they have to have been second? They could have faked it before the USA did.

Surely they had as much if not more incentive as the USA. They were ahead during the early part of the Space Race. When the USA started catching up, a faked landing would have maintained their lead. The propaganda value would have been huge. Faking it would have been cheaper than doing it.


Perverse though it may sound, nobody would have believed them, and they probably knew it. If they had tried to 'out' the US, who had this as a stated aim since 1961? it would have looked like sour grapes..... I know that sounds mighty odd.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 03:29 PM
link   
The were many reasons they elected not to:

a) the risk of being caught far outweighed the benefit

b) Soviets were proud people and "faking it" (which still would take some ingenuity) would be so humiliating that I don't doubt for a second that most skilled personnel would refuse to do it. I grew up there and that I'm sure about.

c) the sheer number of people involved in the "real" effort was so huge that the truth would probably be impossible to contain anyway!



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Absolutely correct, there was no faking all these missions to the moon.. And there were 6 missions in which our men actually touched the moon. If it were just 1 mission, it *might* be questionable, but are really going to fake 6 of them.

There are a load of conspiracy theories published concerning this, and most are addressed by this webpage: NOT FAKED

Here is something for the hoax believers to ponder.... The US and USSR both had intercontinental ballistic missiles and the ability to track them. The moment there was a launch into the atmosphere, both counties where tracking. Trust me on this. The Soviet knew of the launch and they tracked our craft, just as we would track theirs. The first Apollo mission was 9-10 years after sputnik and in the mid 60s, there were many advancements of military missile technology (both guidance and tracking). It was a national priority for both super powers to attain this technology, so there should be little doubt in anyones mind that both parties could track the trajectory of a missile (or in the case a spacecraft, which is essentially the same thing).

Some people will argue this, just for the sake of arguing.. fine. Disprove real science, and then tell us more about gray aliens.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


All of your points could be stated as reasons against the USA faking it as well.

In particular your point


c) the sheer number of people involved in the "real" effort was so huge that the truth would probably be impossible to contain anyway!

is interesting. Is it not true that the KGB could have dealt with anyone coming forth with the truth, turning them into an "unperson". Granted, at that time all we in the west had to go on was western propaganda but certainly there was a great deal of control over state secrets.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Is it not true that the KGB could have dealt with anyone coming forth with the truth, turning them into an "unperson".


KGB was powerful but not to that extent, and in this era. In addition, eliminating (many) thousands of (talented) people who are reponsible for your ballistic missile program hardly seems like a wise move under any regime.



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
In addition, eliminating (many) thousands of (talented) people who are reponsible for your ballistic missile program hardly seems like a wise move under any regime.


Not thousands, only the "rats".


I'm not picking on you buddhasystem. Being an "insider" you're helping make my point. The difficulties of faking a lunar landing overwhelm any incentive to do so. If that were not the case and the USA had done it (faked it), the Soviets probably would have as well.

This argument doesn't prove the landings weren't faked, there's a ton of real evidence for that. It does help point out how absurd the idea is.


[edit on 21-8-2008 by Phage]



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 



Not trying to jump on you, Phage....

BUT....and it was your point to begin with....

If the USA 'faked' it, why couldn't the CCCP do it as well...after all, THEY had the first "artifiacial" satellite, and the first person in ORBIT!!!

The CCCP actually had many 'firsts', compared to the USA....

it was a 'Cold War'....and a lot of stuff was going on, behind the scenes.....

Remember the 'Cuban Milssile' Crises? Remember JFK being assainanted???

NOW, we see nuclear missiles, being placed in Poland, by the United States.....hmmmmmmm????

Similar, much??

THIS EDIT is just to say, for for the misspellings....just wanted to get my point accross.....




[edit on 8/21/0808 by weedwhacker]



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 12:54 AM
link   
maybe because nobody faked the moon landing and USNA went to the moon for real.
[- but it was just a publicity-cold war- space race thing, had nothing to do with space exploration-]



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mapsurfer_


What NASA *should* have done was put a solar beacon on the moon, which transmits some kind of data, even if only a "beep beep" from the moon.

Hi there, 1st post
. Something like this? Mirrors



posted on Mar, 26 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   
It is more likely that they went to the moon with different technogy, and do not want to tell us about that. This is probably the truth behind it.

But very good question, because in theory they could of just faked it before usa, but like i say america i believe went there before and we where not told.




top topics



 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join