Moon Landing Hoax - The Space Suit

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

It's a little thing like MASKING a BIG war.

(DO YOU SEE MASKING A BIG WAR )---perhaps you are to young to know about (VIETNAM)

Evidently, you are too young to remember the era. Every nightly news broadcast reported the "body count."If the object of Apollo was to "mask"the Viet Nam war, it failed miserably.

edit on 11-4-2012 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

Then you reconize the new method. NO news no protests allowed and no silly space program. They have peed away all the $$$$$$$.
glad you get it.

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

Sunglasses reflect solar array. The astronauts had gold. The suits were 28 layers of many different materials, did you know that?

You know if you paint something white, it reflects more solar array than something black, wow, how progressive!

Hi ILLUSTRONIC,
Of course that why piano keys are alternating black/white.
I see YOU noticed how FANCY those suits were. Kind of like HOLLYWOOD on the moon eeh.
red solo cup
ljb

reply to post by Illustronic


Man,

thanks for the video, just brilliant stuff and illustrates nicely the way the hoaxers behave in these threads.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by ngchunter
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

ILC made the space suits for the shuttle as well. The design followed directly from apollo with modifications to make them more generalized in fit rather than individually tailored. If you were intellectually honest you would also be posting photos of shuttle astronauts and claiming they're hoaxers too.

Hi ngc.
The dishonesty here may LIE in the fact we are discussing the moon hoax.
Who cares about fokls rolling around in low earth orbit.

ILC made the space suits for the shuttle as well and those suits used the same principles and the same basic systems to get the job done in thermal and pressure conditions that were just as extreme. By arbitrarily constraining the discussion to the "moon hoax" you show yourself to be intellectually dishonest; the claims being made apply equally to the space shuttle.

Ya know that is a kiddy park ride compared to a moon walk.

Pure and utter nonsense. In fact, taken as a whole program, the EVAs accomplished during the shuttle program were arguably more insurmountable in nature. Far more man hours were required in low earth orbit than on the moon. The cumulative program risk of an accident from an astronaut floating off structure (particularly prior to the advent of the SAFER system), or being struck by a micrometeroid, or otherwise damaging their spacesuit and being killed was considerably higher than for Apollo.

Well I would like to compare NASA's risk assessment for both programs.

A hypothetical 7 hour shuttle EVA was calculated to have a risk of crew member death resulting from the EVA of 1:3000
ntrs.nasa.gov...
The greatest risks that contribute to those odds are common to all shuttle EVAs. Given that ISS construction involved about 1986 man hours of EVA, that means the cumulative risk of at least one crew member being killed on EVA was about 9%. Given the same baseline risk at 164 man hours of EVA during Apollo, the risk of death was only 0.7%. Given that they didn't have the kind of quantitative probabilistic risk assessment back then that we have now ( ntrs.nasa.gov... ), I'll even be really conservative and calculate the cumulative risk for Apollo EVAs at the 95th percentile, a 1:1500 risk of death from a 7 hour EVA. That puts the risk of death during Apollo EVAs at about 1.4%.

You made the rebuttle now back it up. DATA please!!
You do know where to get the RISK ASSESSEMENTS from don't you???
thanks ljb

What part of "you're intellectually dishonest" did you not understand? What part of "the claims being made apply equally to the space shuttle" did you not understand? It's the same company, it's the same space suit systems, it's the same conditions, the main difference is longer man hours in the latter program. You cannot claim one is a hoax for this reason and not simultaneously make the same claim for the other.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by longjohnbritches

 

Direct us to one of your posts that is supported with any links other than your conjectural opinionated biased spew.
I have yet to see one at all. You know, something we can read to determine the credibility of the sources and information conveyed. You participation in this thread is nothing more than an argument clinic skit on a comedy show.

Looks like you provide the ha ha ha's
I'll stick to the facts.
Try posting a video of a sucessful LUNAR LANDER TEST.
red solo cup
ljb

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by ngchunter
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

Hi ngc.
The dishonesty here may LIE in the fact we are discussing the moon hoax.
Who cares about fokls rolling around in low earth orbit.

ILC made the space suits for the shuttle as well and those suits used the same principles and the same basic systems to get the job done in thermal and pressure conditions that were just as extreme. By arbitrarily constraining the discussion to the "moon hoax" you show yourself to be intellectually dishonest; the claims being made apply equally to the space shuttle.

Ya know that is a kiddy park ride compared to a moon walk.

Pure and utter nonsense. In fact, taken as a whole program, the EVAs accomplished during the shuttle program were arguably more insurmountable in nature. Far more man hours were required in low earth orbit than on the moon. The cumulative program risk of an accident from an astronaut floating off structure (particularly prior to the advent of the SAFER system), or being struck by a micrometeroid, or otherwise damaging their spacesuit and being killed was considerably higher than for Apollo.

Well I would like to compare NASA's risk assessment for both programs.

A hypothetical 7 hour shuttle EVA was calculated to have a risk of crew member death resulting from the EVA of 1:3000
ntrs.nasa.gov...
The greatest risks that contribute to those odds are common to all shuttle EVAs. Given that ISS construction involved about 1986 man hours of EVA, that means the cumulative risk of at least one crew member being killed on EVA was about 9%. Given the same baseline risk at 164 man hours of EVA during Apollo, the risk of death was only 0.7%. Given that they didn't have the kind of quantitative probabilistic risk assessment back then that we have now ( ntrs.nasa.gov... ), I'll even be really conservative and calculate the cumulative risk for Apollo EVAs at the 95th percentile, a 1:1500 risk of death from a 7 hour EVA. That puts the risk of death during Apollo EVAs at about 1.4%.

You made the rebuttle now back it up. DATA please!!
You do know where to get the RISK ASSESSEMENTS from don't you???
thanks ljb

What part of "you're intellectually dishonest" did you not understand? What part of "the claims being made apply equally to the space shuttle" did you not understand? It's the same company, it's the same space suit systems, it's the same conditions, the main difference is longer man hours in the latter program. You cannot claim one is a hoax for this reason and not simultaneously make the same claim for the other.

edit on 11-4-2012 by ngchunter because: (no reason given)

First I have no dishonesty period.
I understand and post without a wet blanket of nonsense and void.

At least you admit that NASA did not even figure the RISK to the life or LIMB.
You neglect every thing but death even on the low earth orbit cake walks.
How many died in earth atmosphere?
Did you count them? That number alone trumps the number of folks supposed to have strode the moon surface.
And I am only talking the odds of a successful Apollo 11 start to finish.
ASTRONOMONICAL is what they are. Especially when it is depicted as flawless on a movie or TV screen.

edit on 4/11/2012 by longjohnbritches because: quote jazz

"the Soviets did not have the capability to track deep spacecraft until late in 1972, immediately after which, the last three Apollo missions were suddenly canceled." - Bart sibrel

Okay can someone please provide the official statements regarding the tracking of the apollo missions as i have searched and cannot find any.

three "deep space" sites with larger antennas provided continuous coverage during the trans-lunar, trans-earth and lunar mission phases. Today, these three sites form the NASA Deep Space Network:

- Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex
- Madrid Deep Space Communication Complex
- Canberra Deep Space Communication Complex

The three complexes stated above are all part of Nasa. Are there any official statements regarding the tracking of the apollo mission which are from outside nasa?

reply to post by ngchunter


So there is a test of a lunar lander leaving a command module with a monkey in it that lands on the moon? And then it takes off from the moon and redocks with the CM?

I missed it. sorry

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
First I have no dishonesty period.

You are being intellectually dishonest since the claims apply equally to the shuttle program.

At least you admit that NASA did not even figure the RISK to the life or LIMB.

As I showed above, they determined the risk qualitatively and took steps to minimize the risks.

You neglect every thing but death even on the low earth orbit cake walks.

As I already showed, LEO spacewalks are not "cake walks."

How many died in earth atmosphere?
Did you count them? That number alone trumps the number of folks supposed to have strode the moon surface.

Excuse me, we were talking specifically about EVA risk, not spaceflight risk in general whether in the atmosphere or not. I see that now that you're cornered you jump subjects.

And I am only talking the odds of a successful Apollo 11 start to finish.

Again, now you are changing subjects. Excuse me sir, we were talking about EVA risk specifically. Your attempt to deliberately downplay the risk during shuttle program EVAs is baseless and unwarranted. They used the same space suit systems, company, and the spacewalks carried the same risks. You are intellectually dishonest for failing to apply your claim equally to the shuttle program.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches
reply to post by ngchunter

 

So there is a test of a lunar lander leaving a command module with a monkey in it that lands on the moon? And then it takes off from the moon and redocks with the CM?

I missed it. sorry

More moving of the goalposts. I do not accept your attempt to move the goalposts to an arbitrary new position. You asked for a video showing a successful test of the lunar lander. I gave you two. Want a third that involves the moon?
vimeo.com...
There you go. Now quit with the moving goalpost garbage and admit you were wrong.

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by DerekJR321

Originally posted by longjohnbritches

Originally posted by DerekJR321
Here is my biggest problem with all these "moon landing hoax" posts. And someone mentioned this a few posts back. The USSR at the time was on the brink of nuclear war with us. They had EVERYTHING to gain by reporting the supposedly "fake" moon landing. And they had enough spies in the US to have figured out if it in fact was a hoax.

I don't believe that is putting little thought into it. People can find a conspiracy in anything. Sometimes thinking too much isn't a good thing. So I started with the most simple request. Where is the logic in faking a landing? Or 6?

I don't follow your "A gun to the Russians head" argument. Are you attempting to reference the Cuban Missile Crisis? Your typing is a little off so it's hard for me to follow you. The "Boys came home" from where? Putin said what in relation to Clinton?

What exactly was the big gain in doing that? I don't know all the arguments. Analysis of fuzzy images do nothing for me. NASA recently released photos of the landing site and the first thing I read from people about it, was that it was faked. Why would NASA bother? To get budget money?

Hi drec
I see you have put little thought into your request.
It's a little thing like MASKING a BIG war.

(DO YOU SEE MASKING A BIG WAR )---perhaps you are to young to know about (VIETNAM)

When the film reels emptied. Quess what??? (APOLLO FILMS)


The BOYS came home. (THAT WOULD BE THE SOLDIERS FROM THE WAR)
The US had big stuff in the Ruskies backyard.( DURING THAT WAR)(PLANES, BOMBS, MISSILES, HOWITZERS THOUSANDS OF TROOPS. MAYBE SUBS WITH NUKES PLANES AN MISSILES WITH NUKES)Ya know like a gun to their head.
hope that helps
PS didn't Putin recently say something like Clinton did about not beleiving the US landed a man on the moom?????

Hi again Longjohn.. and thanks for answering my questions with a repeat of your original answer. I am going to assume English is not your first language. As I am 35, I am very aware of Vietnam. I also know it had absolutely nothing to do with the Space Race. Yes I am well aware of the USSR's involvement with giving the NVA weapons, SAMs, etc. I am also aware that several Soviet pilots did engage US Planes over North Vietnam. Can you please elaborate on how that has anything to do with a moon hoax?

Try and make sense this time ok? Maybe think about your post. Spell checking helps too.

Originally posted by toocoolnc

"the Soviets did not have the capability to track deep spacecraft until late in 1972, immediately after which, the last three Apollo missions were suddenly canceled." - Bart sibrel

Okay can someone please provide the official statements regarding the tracking of the apollo missions as i have searched and cannot find any.

three "deep space" sites with larger antennas provided continuous coverage during the trans-lunar, trans-earth and lunar mission phases. Today, these three sites form the NASA Deep Space Network:

- Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex
- Madrid Deep Space Communication Complex
- Canberra Deep Space Communication Complex

The three complexes stated above are all part of Nasa. Are there any official statements regarding the tracking of the apollo mission which are from outside nasa?

www.svengrahn.pp.se...
This guy was specifically listening in to see if NASA was covering anything up:
legacy.jefferson.kctcs.edu...
An article about Soviet tracking:
www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru...
More independent tracking:

A number of other amateurs tracked various Apollo missions both optically and by radio, but for the purposes of this post I decided to stick to radio tracking since that seemed to be the theme of the moment.

reply to post by ngchunter


Thank you for your effort but none of these are official statements.

They are Independent. Are there any offical statements from national space agencies, regarding the tracking of the apollo missions?

Originally posted by toocoolnc
reply to post by ngchunter

 

Thank you for your effort but none of these are official statements.

Wow, thanks for wasting my time by ignoring the evidence you wanted. You want independent tracking of Apollo, but you'll ignore it if it's not an "official statement" from NASA. Do you not see the hypocrisy in that?

reply to post by ngchunter


They are Independent. Are there any offical statements from national space agencies, regarding the tracking of the apollo missions? I am asking for official statements that are not independent nor from nasa.

So these can be national space agencies from other countries, government statements etc.

Originally posted by toocoolnc
reply to post by ngchunter

 

They are Independent. Are there any offical statements from national space agencies, regarding the tracking of the apollo missions? I am asking for official statements that are not independent nor from nasa.

First of all, I don't accept your premise that it needs to be from a national space agency rather than any independent source. That is arbitrary and pointless, sorry. Second of all, I gave you an article about how the Soviets tracked it. If you think the article is a fake then email Roscosmos and ask them, that's up to you to prove, not me.

Originally posted by toocoolnc
reply to post by ngchunter

 

They are Independent. Are there any offical statements from national space agencies, regarding the tracking of the apollo missions? I am asking for official statements that are not independent nor from nasa.

So these can be national space agencies from other countries, government statements etc.

edit on 11-4-2012 by toocoolnc because: (no reason given)

Exactly what other "space agencies" do you think were around in 1969?

The ESA didn't exist then. Japan's didn't exist then. India's didn't exist then......

It was basically NASA and the Soviets.

I find it very much a paradox that you believe we faked the moon landing (IE don't trust was a government agency like NASA says), and then turn around and ask for tracking reports from other "official" tracking stations......which would have been government run too.

So who exactly is it you'd like to see a tracking report from?