It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I don't know how the original measurements of the Van Allen belts' radiation levels changed so much to allow the Apollo missions (but nobody else since) to fly through them. It's not like radiation measurements became so much more accurate somehow that they disproved the Army's (and Van Allen's) original measurements.
Originally posted by ashtonkusher
no stars in the picture....
Originally posted by backinblackUmm no, but they didn't go straight up to the moon either..
They orbited a bit first to get a sling shot effect...
Originally posted by grizzle2
Yeah I know. But they didn't avoid the belts.
The Van Allen belts are full of deadly radiation, and anyone passing through them would be fried.
Needless to say this is a very simplistic statement. Yes, there is deadly radiation in the Van Allen belts, but the nature of that radiation was known to the Apollo engineers and they were able to make suitable preparations. 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 Van Allen belts span only about forty degrees of earth's latitude -- twenty degrees above and below the magnetic equator. The diagrams of Apollo's translunar trajectory printed in various press releases are not entirely accurate. They tend to show only a two-dimensional version of the actual trajectory. The actual trajectory was three-dimensional. The highly technical reports of Apollo, accessible to but not generally understood by the public, give the three-dimensional details of the translunar trajectory.
Each mission flew a slightly different trajectory in order to access its landing site, but the orbital inclination of the translunar coast trajectory was always in the neighborhood of 30°. Stated another way, the geometric plane containing the translunar 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.
This is not to dispute that passage through the Van Allen belts would be dangerous. But NASA conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the nature of the Van Allen belts, culminating in the repeated traversal of the Southern Atlantic Magnetic Anomaly (an intense, low-hanging patch of Van Allen belt) by the Gemini 10 astronauts.
"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen
Really, Luna's vids are my faves. They do a great job. The only fault I can find is that they end too quickly.
That seems to be a contradiction in that Luna Cognita typically performs analysis on NASA photos/videos to expose potential Alien and UFO artifacts. Seemingly if you buy into LC claims, doesn't it require you to accept the NASA photos as legit? Hard to resolve one aspect and discount the other, no?
if you buy into LC claims, doesn't it require you to accept the NASA photos as legit? Hard to resolve one aspect and discount the other, no?
Badda-Bing! That is some heavy science. Can a telescope see the evidence of a past landing?
Originally posted by grizzle2
reply to post by weedwhacker
Let me ask you something - would you go through the Van Allen belts and stand on the surface of the moon with no more protection from x-rays, microwaves and hard cosmic rays than a thin-walled aluminum ship and a linen suit with aluminum foil sewed into it?
edit: Oh yeah I forgot the gamma rays.edit on 3-4-2011 by grizzle2 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by FutureThinker"If you were to stay in, it would kill if you stayed inside the belts for a week, but they didn't," he added....
Originally posted by jrstockBadda-Bing! That is some heavy science. Can a telescope see the evidence of a past landing?