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.

 

Apollo Hardware Spotted!

page: 11
58
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Information on the Russian reflectors can be found on the internet and at your local library.

I recommend google as a starting point should you choose to use the internet for research into the laser reflectors mounted on the Lunokhod rovers.




posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Xubieee....why don't you tell the full story of the 'Russian reflectors'???

Hmmmmm?????


I will save him some time, and also include a link to the source, which "Xubieee" sometimes seems to have problems with.



Retroreflectors were placed on the Moon by the astronauts of Apollo 11, 14 and 15 in 1969 and 1971. All Apollo reflectors are still functional. Two more, built in France, were carried on Soviet Lunokhod remotely controlled rovers in 1970 and 1973. Lunokhod 2’s reflector is still functional today. Lunokhod 1 also carried a reflector, but returns from it have not been detected since early in its mission . It should be noted that many references to the Soviet missions mistakenly state the opposite, that Lunokhod 2’s reflector cannot be used but Lunokhod 1’s can be. It is not known why Lunokhod 1 cannot be detected today. Possibilities may include a bad orien-tation (severe tilt on a crater slope?), excessive con-tamination by regolith (perhaps thrown up by wheels during efforts to free the rover from a steep crater slope on 13 April 1971, or other similar events), shad-owing by a partly closed ‘lid’ or other rover structure, or uncertainties in location causing erroneous target-ing.

www.lpi.usra.edu...



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Exuberant1
 



They can be placed using unmanned missions.

That is how the Russians got their reflectors on the moon.


Xubieee....why don't you tell the full story of the 'Russian reflectors'???

Hmmmmm?????


He doesnt want to because he knows they worked for less than 10 min and never worked again. Why no one was there to correct there positioning and currently useless.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Has anyone noticed on these pictures how, despite the amount of craters, there only seems to 5-6 different sizes of crater?? Bit odd dont ya think (not suggesting conspiracy, just perculiarity).

EDIT: And some of them look organised, lol.

[edit on 18/7/09 by woogleuk]

[edit on 18/7/09 by woogleuk]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr

He doesnt want to because he knows they worked for less than 10 min and never worked again.


Incorrect.

Lunokhod 2 continues to be detected by lunar laser ranging experiments.


In fact, Lunokhod 2 is still being used by NASA as a Ranging Reflector in conjunction with ours to ensure grater accuracy in determining the Moon's distance and rate of orbit as it moves farther away from the Earth.

So you are mistaken - or being dishonest....

Regardless, this is proof that laser reflectors can be placed on the Lunar surface via unmanned mission.


[edit on 18-7-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

(DOD over a Russian Flag with a camouflaged [stealth] shuttle....hmmmmm)

That looks more like an inverted Netherlands' flag or a sideways French flag than a Russian flag.

Netherlands


France


Russia



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

That looks more like an inverted Netherlands' flag or a sideways French flag than a Russian flag.



Armap,

Now you are just nit-picking.


...And ignoring the Buran shuttle in the second patch...


(I wonder would our Contingency Support Office is doing with those...)

[edit on 18-7-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Armap,

Now you are just nit-picking.
As always.



...And ignoring the Buran shuttle in the second patch...
That was why I only talked about the flag.


PS: embroidery is easy to do, I can make you a patch like that, if you want it.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by trace_the_truth
 


Why isn't your ATS registration date showing up under your name i wonder??

You know, if ANYTHING is going to drive disclosure, it will be what you sarcastically touched upon.

Now a host of other countries are planning to go to the moon (and have sent probes) and space tourism, and soon moon tourism get's started the truth will come out.

Disclosure will happen before disclosure HAS to happen. And as soon as private citizens start going to the moon (albeit super-rich private citizens at first) they will have no choice in the matter, they'll have to tell all.

Of course, they'll try to justify the lies by saying along the lines of 'preventing public panic' (yeah, right!) and preventing economic collapse (tooooo late for that!) and to keep religious cohesion (Errm...religious cohesion? On this planet?! Sure...).

The only other way to get around it would be to scupper any private space initiative one way or another...hey, perhaps religious terrorists could blow up a few private rockets, and they could cancel all private launches on the grounds of National security eh?
Oh no, how silly of me...we have religious cohesion on this planet don't we, so that won't happen will it!



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


The Buran???



Well....not a very reliable 'Contingency' system, hmmm?


First flight

The only orbital launch of Buran occurred at 3:00 UTC on 15 November 1988 from Baikonur Cosmodrome Site 110/37. It was lifted into orbit unmanned by the specially designed Energia booster rocket. The life support system was partially installed and no software was installed to run the computer display screens.

The shuttle orbited the Earth twice in 206 minutes of flight. It performed an automated landing on the shuttle runway at Baikonur Cosmodrome where, despite a lateral wind speed of 61.2 kilometres (38.0 mi) /hour, it landed only 3 metres (9.8 ft) laterally and 10 metres (33 ft) longitudinally from the target.


Video and speculations

Part of the launch was televised but the actual lift-off was not shown. This led to some speculation that the mission may have been fabricated, and that the subsequent landing may not have been from orbit but from a shuttle-carrying aircraft, as with the Space Shuttle Enterprise. The launch video has since been released to the public, confirming that the shuttle did indeed lift off with the poor weather conditions described by the Soviet media at the time easily seen.


Projected flights

In 1989, it was projected that Buran would have an unmanned second flight in 1993, with a duration of 15–20 days. Due to the cancellation of the project, this never took place. Several scientists have been looking into trying to revive the Buran program, especially after the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster. Currently, none of these plans have come to further fruition; however, there have recently been new interests in renewing the program temporarily while Russia struggles with the CSTS and Kliper design stages.

Destruction

On May 12, 2002, a hangar housing Buran in Kazakhstan collapsed, due to poor maintenance . The collapse killed eight workers and destroyed the orbiter as well as a mock-up of an Energia booster rocket.


en.wikipedia.org...(spacecraft)

However, maybe this is where the rumours come from:


The Soviet-era Buran space programme, mothballed 20 years ago, may be revived. With NASA about to retire its ageing fleet of space shuttles, there is a pressing need for viable space transport.

Two decades ago the Soviet space shuttle Buran blasted off on its first and only orbital flight. Just a few years later, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the programme was shelved.

After nearly a decade in a hangar, the only Buran that went into space was destroyed when a roof collapsed at Baikonur launch facility in 2002.

Although the Buran project ended prematurely, not all the ideas from it were left buried. Some of the technologies developed at the time are now used in everyday life. Fore example, several heat-resistant materials used to make deep-fryers are a direct result of the research done during Buran's development.

Buran technologies may make an unexpected return to the space industry as well.

Because NASA will soon retire its ageing space shuttle fleet, some American and Russian scientists are beginning to think of ways to revive the Buran programme.

It may be more economical than developing an entirely new spacecraft from scratch.

www.russiatoday.com...



[edit on 18 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by spikey
Why isn't your ATS registration date showing up under your name i wonder??
It's off-topic, but as that is something that puzzles many people I will tell you.

It's because he was banned, banned members do not show any information on the mini-profile.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Off topic again, but thanks for the reply.

I'm confused as to how a banned member can post?

Doesn't banned mean...banned?



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
The Buran???
Well....not a very reliable 'Contingency' system, hmmm?


The only problem with your LOGIC is that you only consider one set of data... the data that best suits your theory


Buran destroyed? Who says? Parked maybe


Buran OK TVA
55°43'43.39"N 37°35'46.95"E

This one is dismantled... I hear they are selling pieces


Buran 2.01 "Baikal"
+55° 50' 28.95", +37° 27' 58.34"

Buran OK-ML-1
45°55'10.15"N 63°18'35.99"E

Buran OK-GLI
In pieces ready for shipping
+26° 11' 54.03", +50° 36' 8.74"

That is only the ones spotted on Google Earth... doesn't include the hidden ones or the LKS







[edit on 18-7-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   
nasa sure did get aweful gung ho about finding/photographing this lander stuff. i dont think ive seen nasa jump this quick (from announcement to results).

they must have picked up the bantemual inter-galactic phone (implant variety) and called the boss on the moon to have them set up the equipment LMAO.
now, if they would only release such in depth and detailed pics of copernicus (or a few other choice areas).....

oh well.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by weedwhacker
The Buran???
Well....not a very reliable 'Contingency' system, hmmm?


The only problem with your LOGIC is that you only consider one set of data... the data that best suits your theory


Buran destroyed? Who says? Parked maybe


Buran OK TVA
55°43'43.39"N 37°35'46.95"E

This one is dismantled... I hear they are selling pieces


Buran 2.01 "Baikal"
+55° 50' 28.95", +37° 27' 58.34"

Buran OK-ML-1
45°55'10.15"N 63°18'35.99"E

Buran OK-GLI
In pieces ready for shipping
+26° 11' 54.03", +50° 36' 8.74"

That is only the ones spotted on Google Earth... doesn't include the hidden ones or the LKS







[edit on 18-7-2009 by zorgon]


speaking of data sets...until recently, i thought i had a good handle on the moon and what might be/is going on there.

funny how quickly things change. i am just glad my world view makes it easy for me to adjust cause denial is not a fun place to hang out LMAO.

[edit on 18-7-2009 by anonamousantichrist]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   
This reminds me A LOT of the 9/11 Pentagon footage....WORTHLESS and BS! Just more government jerkoffs thinking WE are dumb enough to believe whatever they say is truth....



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silk
Its time for the followers of a French Students myth to lie back and accept reality


Reality? here is your 'reality' though I see the Apollo believers tend to just ignore it




Originally posted by zorgon
So NASA says its a spacecraft and all the Apollo believers run and create a page that says "See" Its not a rock, its proof..." and now they tell me "Oh yeah but this... Yuppers its a SPACECRAFT"



But when Zorgon says "Its an artifact on Eros, and Zorgon's picture is much better resolution than NASA's, those same skeptics say "Its just a rock" even though we also landed a probe on Eros



In response to this resident expert Phage had this to say...


Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by zorgon
 

It's impossible to tell from either image what each is. Both could be rocks. The difference is that we know there are vehicles on the Moon. The difference is that we know exactly where they are. The difference is that the Eagle is exactly where it's supposed to be so we know it is not a rock.



So the ONLY reason that people are not saying 'its only rocks' on these new NASA images is because they Expect to see something, not because it is actually recognizable from amongst the rocks.

I trust Phages analysis on this one...



It's impossible to tell from either image what each is. Both could be rocks.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 



Buran OK TVA
55°43'43.39"N 37°35'46.95"E


You mean the Buran, in plain view? In Moscow???

On the bank of the River? On Pushkinskaya naberezhnaya??

Near Gorky Park?

THAT one?




Here's the Enterprise




[edit on 18 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon


In response to this resident expert Phage had this to say...


Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by zorgon
 

It's impossible to tell from either image what each is. Both could be rocks. The difference is that we know there are vehicles on the Moon. The difference is that we know exactly where they are. The difference is that the Eagle is exactly where it's supposed to be so we know it is not a rock.





I like Phage but "Expert"?
I trust his opinion on many subjects but...
I've never known him to claim expertise on anything.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
I like Phage but "Expert"?


my bad... I didn't want to use the " " tags and sound like I was being condescending. I actually 100% agree with that... If my images can be just rocks, so can these new ones. The difference is in who believes what and thus we are no closer to resolution... only that we have placed the right shoe on the left foot and its 'our side' that is now saying "Its only rocks"

I expect to find artifacts in my images so I say "Its an artifact"
Others now expect to see Apollo scrap and so say "Its a spacecraft"

Now I am going to screen capture Phages quote... it has value



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join