NASA ADMITS: Moon Landing Tapes Got Erased

reply to post by conar

Why does Nasa delete the biggest moment in history?

It was saved elsewhere.

Why was the Apollo 1 astronauts not saved?

THAT is a whole can of worms....and a favorite of conspiracy theorists. Officially, there were no explosive bolts on the egress hatch. It had no quick-exit system. AND it was designed to open inward, against the nternal pressure (like airliner doors).

How can the austronauts survive in space with all the radiation from the sun, and the 200 degrees, when their only protection was a thin layer aluminium folie?

Bogus question. The radiation is not that deadly, unless you remain unprotected for months and years at a time.

Why is there an area in Area 51 that looks like the Moon?

Irrelelvant. There are places all over the planet that are "other-wordly".

What about heat and cold?
"Without thermal controls, the temperature of the orbiting Space Station's Sun-facing side would soar to 250 degrees F (121 C), while thermometers on the dark side would plunge to minus 250 degrees F (-157 C)."

Look at the layers ISS needs to protect from heat and cold and radiation.

16 layers!

Even with the latest super thin fabrics.

What did they use 40 years ago?

reply to post by conar

What did they use 40 years ago?

The ISS is intended for long-term flight, years and years.

The Apollo combined Service Module/Command Module would rotate occasionally, during the trip from Earth-Moon-Earth. That regulated heating/cooling, and kept things stable.

Inside, actually, they needed heaters!!

If you see the details about Apollo 13, they got very cold, as they had to conserve electricity after the accident in the Service Module. The temperature inside the living spaces dropped, they took refuge in the LM and used its power, its batteries. Inside the CM, in the cold, there was a lot of moisture condensing out of the air, and that caused concern, such as shorts in the electrical switches.

The vacuum of space is a near perfect insulator. The temperature ranges they mention in those articles refer to the surfaces, the outsides, of objects in space.

reply to post by conar

What makes you think they were unprotected?

The entire ascent stage structure is enveloped with a thermal and micrometeoroid shield, which combines a blanket of multiple layers of aluminized polyimide sheet (Kapton H-film) and aluminized polyester sheet (mylar) with a sandwich of Inconel skin, Inconel mesh and nickel foil or a polyimide blanket with a single sheet of aluminum skin. The blanket panels, formed in various shapes and sizes, consist (outboard to inboard) of 15 layers of 0.0005-inch-thick H-film. In a few ascent stage areas that have different thermal-protection requirements, the number of layers in a blanket panel varies slightly. Outboard to inboard, the the sandwich comprises a 0.0015-inch-thick Inconel skin and one or more layers of Inconel mesh alternated with 0.0005-inch-thick nickel foil. the number of Inconel mesh and nickel foil layers in a sandwich and the thickness of the aluminum skin vary considerably at different areas of the vehicle, depending on the duration and intensity of RCS thruster plume impingement at those areas. The combined thermal and micrometeoroid shield is mounted on low-thermal-conductive supports (standoffs), which keep it at least 2 inches from the main structure... The aluminum or Inconel skin (the outermost material) serves as a micrometoroid bumper; the sandwich and blanket material serve as thermal shielding...

The aluminized Mylar blankets insulate the structure against temperatures up to +350 (deg) F. On the TCA support truss members, which are subjected to temperatures in excess of +350 (deg) F due to engine radiation, an additional 20 layers of H-film are installed. H-film has an insulating capability up to +1,000 (deg) F. Additional H-film blankets are also used in other areas of the ascent stage that will be subjected to temperatures in excess of +350 (deg) F.

history.nasa.gov...


[edit on 7/18/2009 by Phage]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by conar

 

Why does Nasa delete the biggest moment in history?

It was saved elsewhere.

I'm not quite buying that.

Even if it WAS saved elsewhere, why would you still erase the original tapes? Can you think of any good reason? I think it's also pretty obvious no one really needed to use them considering where they found them and what they were doing (just sitting there).

reply to post by Phage


And you would feel comfortable wearing that 'protection walking into the hot spot at Three Mile Island?



Just asking...

When I get an X-ray that lasts seconds they give you a lead blanket... Heavy things... Why don't the med teams use those aluminum foil thingies NASA made so many years ago?



What I want to see is one of those Apollo Moon Suits placed into a radiation chamber (with some detectors inside or an ATS volunteer ) and show me how much radiation they insulate against and for how long. Surely that would be an easy test?



[edit on 18-7-2009 by zorgon]

[edit on 18-7-2009 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon


You'll probably be told because lead is too heavy to launch into space.

I'd be interested to see a technical comparison of them though, as in how much radiation they actually shield or what thermal properties they actually have, in numbers that can be compared. Those are some extremely thin layers on the spacecraft. I understand they have to be light, but there are always other implications making things so thin, no matter what kind of material it is. Even the strongest material in the world will snap like nothing when it's a hair's-breadth thickness.



Edit: Also, look up what kind of barriers FEMA suggests to block nuclear radiation, even many miles from a blast site (because obviously anything near the actual blast is already gone). They recommend several feet of sandbags, concrete, dirt, etc. All for a burst of radiation that is short-lived and has already dissipated greatly.

[edit on 18-7-2009 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Bogus question. The radiation is not that deadly, unless you remain unprotected for months and years at a time.

That one we can't take your word for, you cannot make a statement like that without proof

Originally posted by zorgon
reply to post by Phage

 

And you would feel comfortable wearing that 'protection walking into the hot spot at Three Mile Island?

Just asking...

When I get an X-ray that lasts seconds they give you a lead blanket... Heavy things... Why don't the med teams use those aluminum foil thingies NASA made so many years ago?

Litigation culture?

reply to post by zorgon

The question was about thermal protection.
But the shielding provided by the blankets, as well as the structure of the LM (and CM) itself was more than adequate to provide protection from the radiation encountered enroute and on the surface of the Moon.

The lead blankie the dentist gives you probably costs less and it makes you feel safer too.

[edit on 7/18/2009 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


That would be your assumption but what I for one am asking is where are the stat sheets? How did they come up with this stuff and KNOW that it was going to be sufficient? The technical data, compared to a lead blanket for example.

reply to post by bsbray11


lsda.jsc.nasa.gov...

They knew about it ahead of time because they sent satellites up there to find out.

reply to post by Kevin_X2


Welcome to the digital age once they have a copy the magnetic tapes are useless and in fact the recordings would have suffered severe degradation by now any way. Most video experts agree though the life span is between 8 to 12 years and they recommend transferring them into digital media within the first 5 years because color and clarity begins to be effected. What does this mean the tapes were useless along time ago.



[edit on 7/18/09 by dragonridr]

reply to post by zorgon

That one we can't take your word for, you cannot make a statement like that without proof

Yeah. I did that somewhere else, another thread. THIS thread is about erasing Apollo 11 tapes, and radiation didn't do that?

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Utter rubbish! We are talking, here, ONLY about Apollo 11 footage. The color camera taken on Apollo 12 was accidentally aimed at the Sun, with the lens cap off, by Alan Bean (and boy did he feel bad about that!). Apollo 13, well never landed. SO, 14, 15, 16 and 17 all have good, color video. AND all of the landings have loads of still photos!!!

WW, you know I adore you, but............................

How was it when you were explaining to WW Jr. that Daddy lost the footage of
his first steps?

Sure you have his 2nd steps and 3rd and so on, but not those very first important ones.

Just not the same in my book.

We are a society (planet) that focuses on first's. (Medical breakthroughs, Sports and Olympics, World Records, Solo journeys etc.)

Like my very first love. Karen Whatshername.

It is a blunder of EPIC proportion. And unfortunately for NASA, not a first.

(BTW, I could go on and on about my views on the 'enhanced' footage.)

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 18-7-2009 by kinda kurious]

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Bogus question. The radiation is not that deadly, unless you remain unprotected for months and years at a time.

That one we can't take your word for, you cannot make a statement like that without proof

The principle danger of the Van Allen belts is high-energy protons, which are not that difficult to shield against. And the Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the exposure. the trans lunar trajectory was inclined to the earth's equator by about 30°. A spacecraft following that trajectory would bypass all but the edges of the Van Allen belts. If your curios how they figured this out radiation levels in the command capsule suggest you look at Apollo 4 and 6.

reply to post by weedwhacker


The SeaLaunch platform would suffice. You are aware of the Heavy Lift program, right? What was the military lifting? What purpose did the Aquila serve?

My mother grew up in her teens living on Kwajelein (i still owe scans of the missile launches, etc, to some members here). About 1968-69 the military told the local civilians that they had somehow botched the recording of the launch that had happened. The entire island, when a launch happened, would picnic and record the launches with their A/V equpment (since there was no television, people were really into A/V stuff, my grandfathers stereo, even outdated, was a subject of envy when i was a teen).

Of course, many of the patriotic islanders responded to the request for their footage. A couple of weeks later, the U.S. military notifed all persons on the island that they were no longer allowed to witness launches. MP's would patrol the streets and ensure that all non-essential persons were inside their homes. A curfew was put into effect.

Why? I don't believe that they messed up their footage. It was their cover story.

My uncle claims that they launched some very large rockets out there. He doesn't know what they were (due to the curfew), but knows that they were larger after this incident, just by the amount of noise created during launch.

He also believes that there was some other missile interception technology being tested starting around 1970. He doesn't know what it was, but claims it was different than what you would see in tests during the late 1960's.

They left the island in 1971. My grandfather (who served at the end of WWII) worked on the coolant systems in the missile silo's. When he left Kwaj, he moved to West Texas to run his own Heating/AC business until he died.

[edit on 18-7-2009 by bigfatfurrytexan]

Originally posted by bsbray11
I'd be interested to see a technical comparison of them though, as in how much radiation they actually shield or what thermal properties they actually have, in numbers that can be compared.

I too would like to see those results

And since it's there team that claims it's good enough, the onus would be on them to provide us with the data proving indeed that these materials can do what is claimed. Its always annoying to be asked for proof, but when the other side makes a claim they feel they don't have to provide the backup data

Originally posted by zorgon
Day One EVA

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/285ee08c94d2.png[/atsimg]


Day Two Eva 17 miles away..

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d22a382147e8.png[/atsimg]

I don't know where did they got those images (and the explanation), but I went looking for the audio, and found that those words (from both occasions) were spoken during the first EVA, with a difference of around 5 minutes and 15 seconds between them.

And the video does not match with the videos available on the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal, the source of my information for this, as you can see in the videos bellow.


The words "couldn't pick a better spot" are spoken at 01:15

This second video starts when the first ends.


The words "most beautiful sight" are spoken at 02:23

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Litigation culture?

perhaps... but after watching the cute x-ray technician struggling to lift that heavy blanket seems NASA could release some of that old tech... that is if it actually works