If I were to go out with a hasseblad these days the quality would be pretty much the same. I doubt that you could even tell the difference.

ps. does that smiley face mean you were joking?

Originally posted by CarbonFooledYa
Yes, sublimation would work if you had a system that actually produced sublimation. NASA had a water cooled suit. The water took heat from astronaut and brought it to a plate in the backpack where it would freeze on a cold plate. The frozen water would then sublimate to vapour taking heat away. And how did the water in the suit turn to ice on the sublimation plate?

It works the exact same way the sublimators on TODAY'S space suits work. Nothing's radically changed in how spacesuit sublimators function in the last 40 years. If you have a problem with that then you're really saying you think modern ISS and shuttle missions are hoaxes because they rely just as much on the exact same sublimators. I know for a fact that's not true. As JRA said, space is neither hot nor cold, it doesn't simply doesn't conduct heat the way air does. As long as the sublimator plate is designed to reflect away enough sunlight and is kept insulated from other heat-forming elements in the suit it will naturally assume a "cold" temperature and allow water to freeze to it.

I often hear that. That it was specially shielded against heat and radiation. The buttons and latches made bigger so those sausage fingers could open them. Some accounts say they were chromed, others say it was white painted aluminium.

Either would reflect sunlight quite nicely and prevent overheating.

All that shielding is going to be useless once you take the cartridge out of the camera. The exposure to cosmic nuclear radiation would ruin the film.

Prove it. Quantify the amount of radiation and show that it would be too much for low ISO film. The fact is that it's not too much for cosmic radiation; many probes in the early days of spaceflight relied on film being brought by the probe and developed in deep space for transmission back to earth. The radiation flux isn't enough to damage low ISO films. That's why you can send low ISO film through x-ray scanners at the airport with no ill effect.

NASA was made aware of the problem with the tyres in the 70s. They retroactively altered some of the photos and changed the tyres of the Lunar Buggy on display from rubber tube to wire mesh.

Oh, and they also went back and changed all our memories too? That's an insane claim, please PROVE it.

[edit on 26-10-2009 by ngchunter]

Originally posted by CarbonFooledYa
...NASA was made aware of the problem with the tyres in the 70s. They retroactively altered some of the photos and changed the tyres of the Lunar Buggy on display from rubber tube to wire mesh...

You may be confused here (at least I hope you're confused, because the idea that NASA somehow erased everyone's memories regarding the use of rubber tires is ludicrous)...

...The tires on the lunar rover training vehicle used here on Earth were inflated rubber. Because it was only a training vehicle, there is no reason for it to have the expensive wire mesh wheels. Perhaps those are the rubber tires that you remember (and, hence, your confusion).

This is only a guess, but I also think the wire mesh wheels would not work on Earth because they were designed to support less weight on the Moon. The wire mesh wheels perhaps may have collapsed here on Earth under the extra forces imposed on them during driving (and bouncing). If wire wheels were used on the training vehicle, they would have needed to be designed to support 6 times the forces that would have been imposed on them during use on the Moon.

Like I said, perhaps your memory of the rubber tires is from the training vehicles. The mesh tires were one of the most famous and memorable design characteristics of the rovers used on the Moon, and that's why people (especially engineering geeks like me) remember it so vividly.

General Motors designed the rover, and many of the original GM employees who designed and constructed the lunar rover are still alive today, and I think they would have remembered what material they used for the tires. Not to mention all of the other people in the world who remember that the wheels were wire mesh.

I never heard anyone else make the claim that you are making about the tires.

Perhaps they can change photos (and I'm not saying that they did), but like ngchunter said, there is no way they can change the memories of all of the people who are SURE the wheels on the production model Lunar Rovers were always made of wire mesh.

If you disregard my idea that it is your memory that is wrong (and not everyone else's memories), then please provide more proof to this claim other than "it's true because I said so".

Any Photos of the Astronauts putting the ROVER 'together' or assembling after landing?

As I click on the larger photograph, the craft disappears.
Good option.
We should be able to read printing on the landers with satellites
that can read license plates on cars.
More technology denied to truth seekers.
Verifying anything seems to be a big lacking in our society.
Science and truth taken for granted is better than lies.

Moon truthers should start up fund perhaps for a Moon satellite
and a private Moon launch as has been suggested as the way to
go among NASA releases or as seen on ATS perhaps.

The Moon truthers in control of the camera and transmissions.
What is more important than that in this day and age.
Osama, Afghanistan, Iran and North Korea can take care of themselves.
So can we.

Better have guards at the doors to the Moon room as any thing
from UFO jamming to 'nut job terror' raid might take place.
The Moon Mission appears to be the most closely guarded secret
next to the UFO and a slew of other conspiracies.

If truthers want to start finding what is behind the stonewall of
the conspiracies what better way is to achieve something that
is practical and easy to do with the same technology now given
out to the world for all to use.

A nice big chip in the wall.
Go find the landers.
Busted

That sounds great.
Skip the expensive satellite for the moon truthers.
Get some dinky remote moon rover and bounce land it
close enough to scout over to one lander.
Just one lander would be enough.

Perhaps some would want to see more evidence like foot
prints but I think the conspiracy would surely end.

The conspiracy dead in the water.
Kennedy was right, we went to the moon.

NASA might go back for old time sakes.
So we won't crash artifacts.
I don't think moon truthers will get much together.

Well there were some bright pixels for the landers in those site images.
But as time goes on more advance imagery will put 3D landers down.
And those that say no will still be with us.

I suppose I like going over issues as well as anyone.
Yeah for old times sake we might see them again.
That might happen. By official call by NASA.

I can remember from day one, as I go back that far, the
radiation problem was always there and then the Van Allen
belts were recognized.

And the issue still remains.
The outer space radiation danger people feel the Van Allen
announcement side stepped the real dangers and even added
to the difficulties of safe flight.

For myself I always felt we didn't know enough about gravity
or have superior control over gravity. I now am fairly sure
that some have this great knowledge beyond the newton
dynamics but see where there is quite a different technology
involved and newton is sufficient for now.

We are far from the 50s fancy of space stations as the end of the
line seems to be approaching. No rotating tube to simulate gravity
for the stations so far. I have seen a video presentation of Russia
planning for the Mars mission so just wonder what the next steps
are going to materialize

Originally posted by Seiko

The one thing I find interesting about these two pics at first glance is that the shadow of the lunar module you point out as being square is cast to the right of the lm, yet all the moon rocks csst shadows to the left.

Am I observing this wrong?

Ah well, all those moon 'rocks' are actually craters. I'm sure you've spotted it by now though.

S