How many times does Neil Armstrong lie to us in this 1970 BBC interview.

reply to post by OutonaLimb

Have you ever heard of cold welding? I suggest you look it up. Manned (or even unmanned) space travel is an impossibility.

So the ISS is a hoax as well is it?......and the Mars rover expeditions? including the current Curiosity mission?....all hoaxes in your opinion?

Moon hoax believers are all the same type of person

They are all :

Only just more intelligent than a rock

Incredibly dull

Incredibly unattractive because of the above

Unable to see past their own illness the error in their logic

They smell bad too.

So you may or may not believe my statements but that's my point.

RIP. NA

Hasnt the moonlanding been corroborated by images of the moon shot by foreign space agencies?

Originally posted by Argyll
reply to post by OutonaLimb

 

Have you ever heard of cold welding? I suggest you look it up. Manned (or even unmanned) space travel is an impossibility.

So the ISS is a hoax as well is it?......and the Mars rover expeditions? including the current Curiosity mission?....all hoaxes in your opinion?

Yes. Each and every one.
Have you any comment on the cold welding phenomena?

Originally posted by OutonaLimb
Yes. Each and every one.
Have you any comment on the cold welding phenomena?

I have.

Mechanical problems in early satellites were sometimes attributed to cold welding. However, in 2006, Henry Spencer stated that the phenomenon of spontaneous cold welding in outer space is "basically a myth", pointing out that "there are no documented cases of it actually occurring in orbit, except in experiments deliberately designed to provoke it (with susceptible materials, great care to avoid contamination, and deliberate mechanical removal of oxide layers, etc.)."

Three years following this 2006 post the European Space Agency published a peer reviewed paper detailing why cold welding is a significant issue that spacecraft designers need to carefully consider. The conclusions of this appropriately titled study can be found on page 25 of "Assessment of Cold Welding between Separable Contact Surfaces due to Impact and Fretting under Vacuum". The paper also cites a documented example from 1991 with the Galileo spacecraft high-gain antenna (see page 2; the technical source document from NASA regarding the Galileo spacecraft is also provided in a link here).

Source

So the pros disagree with you. Can you prove them wrong?

He wound up his final interview by tackling the most controversial issue (yes, Malley went there): Was the moon landing faked? Armstrong answers with a chuckle.

"People love conspiracy theories," he said.

"They're very attractive, but they were never a concern to me -- because I know that one day somebody's going to fly back up there and pick up that camera I left there."

you tell 'em Neil

give it up

even on a conspiracy board, this idea has no traction

Honestly, why, WHY would a moon landing be faked? Another poster on this thread nailed it right on the head by saying that if it WAS a fake, the Russians would be all over us denouncing it as a hoax. Discount it if you want, but the facts are irrefutable. It sounds like (and take this at face value as my own personal opinion) Denial in the face of facts must be the IN thing to do these days.

Originally posted by Kolya

edit on 26/8/2012 by Kolya because: (no reason given)

That was awesome !

Here's the real footage...

R rating for the language contained within the film

Originally posted by Cassius666
Hasnt the moonlanding been corroborated by images of the moon shot by foreign space agencies?

yes it has been corroborated at least by the Russians as far as I know.

Originally posted by PsykoOps

I have.

Mechanical problems in early satellites were sometimes attributed to cold welding. However, in 2006, Henry Spencer stated that the phenomenon of spontaneous cold welding in outer space is "basically a myth", pointing out that "there are no documented cases of it actually occurring in orbit, except in experiments deliberately designed to provoke it (with susceptible materials, great care to avoid contamination, and deliberate mechanical removal of oxide layers, etc.).".....

Source

So the pros disagree with you. Can you prove them wrong?

esmat.esa.int...

ESA STM-279 25 wrote:
5 Conclusions

1. Test equipment (Annex A) and a test method (Annex B ) have been
developed to study the cold welding of material interfaces that make
contact under impact and fretting conditions. The method and the results
represent a step forward in studies of cold welding effects from ‘common
experience’ to measurable data that will be useful for designers of
spacecraft applications.

2. In order to provide engineers with the experimental data, AIT has set up
an online database that aims to bring together all the data generated from
all studies performed for ESA and industry. The database can be accessed
free of charge after registration: service.arcs.ac.at...

3. It has been shown that the theoretical predictions are by no means
comparable with experimental data. The main reason is that the
adhesion force is driven by the ‘real contact area’, which can not be
predicted. Hertzian theory would predict a ‘nominal contact area’,
neglecting surface roughness and surface contamination. The latter in
particular is the main contributor and remains unpredictable.

4. A wide range of material combinations, including metal–metal (SS17-
7PH in contact with itself and Al alloy AA 7075 in contact with itself),
metal–polymer (SS17-7PH versus Vespel SP3), as well as several
coatings on steel, aluminum and titanium have been investigated under
impact and fretting conditions. The data can be found in Annex C. These
results and those of future work are now searchable online.

5. Tests have revealed that the range of adhesion forces in uncoated metal–
metal contacts with typical engineering surfaces and without coatings
depend on the type of contact:

– in static contact, adhesion forces were below 0.5 N,
– under impact, adhesion forces were up to 2 N, and
– under fretting, adhesion forces in excess of 18 N were found.

Basic material physics (type of atomic bonds) indicate that no technically
measurable adhesion between metals and polymers and ceramics can
be expected. A few tests on steel or aluminum and polyimide have not
contradicted this premise.

6. In order to avoid cold welding, polymers or ceramics can be selected, but
these materials may not be suitable for space hardware and mechanisms.
Hence, metal–metal contacts often cannot be avoided. In that case, in
order to reduce the risk of cold welding, the first strategy would be to use
dissimilar alloy pairs, e.g. stainless steel versus hard steel (low adhesion
is likely). The second strategy would be to apply coatings, although here
the type of contact and the substrate material need to be well known.

7. Under impact, hard coatings on stainless steel (TiC, for instance) may
break, so that although the risk of adhesion is lower, it is still present.
Soft coatings made of solid lubricants (e.g. MoS2) can repair themselves
during impact, so they are more effective in preventing adhesion than hard
coatings. Stainless steels are generally too soft to support hard coatings
under impact conditions. Hard anodised aluminum can withstand
impact. Titanium alloys must be coated with hard coatings to resist cold
welding if only impact is expected.

cont.

...cont.

8. Under fretting conditions, none of the investigated coatings on stainless
steel (SS17-7PH) is able to prevent cold welding. Also MoS2 is not
effective under fretting, and the lubrication is quickly lost. Hence, the
best strategy must be to use different steels (maximum one of which
should be austenitic). Hard coatings should not be used on hard steels.
In contrast with steel, hard anodising of aluminium prevents adhesion
under fretting conditions, but much loose debris is formed. A thick
‘Keronite’ coating (20 µm), which is based on a plasma-electrolytic
oxidation (PEO) process, is not only resistant to fretting but also avoids
debris formation. A test using an uncoated titanium pin against coated
titanium discs did not provide a ‘general solution’. All thin coatings – solid
lubricants and hard coatings – were destroyed in the fretting contact. The
best combinations still showed medium adhesion after breakage of the
coating. The combination titanium and low-adhesion steel also did not
provide a solution. Further research will target thick coatings produced
by PEO (Keronite).

Besides in the conclusions of the essay by ESA "Assessment of Cold Welding between
Separable Contact Surfaces due to Impact and Fretting under Vacuum", published
November 2009, their recommendations show they still don't know what kind of materials
would be able to withstand cold welding and fretting, nor understand what exactly causes
the phenomenon That means no successful spacecraft has ever traveled more than a few
dozen miles into space or the problem would have been solved more that half a century
ago, what with all reported missions to outer space.

reply to post by OutonaLimb


There is nothing in your last post that provides proof

You will not be able to produce it

Originally posted by Freeborn
reply to post by de_Genova

 

Do you honestly think that if there was even the slightest bit of credible evidence that NASA and the US government faked the Apollo 11 mission that the Soviet Union would have remained quiet about it?
They would have been all over it and using it as a propoganda weapon to completely discredit the US on the international stage.
That neither they or China did anything of the sort speaks volumes.

Unless of course you believe they were in on the 'conspiracy'?

Have you ever read 1984? If you have, I think you know where i'm going with that idea.
I'm not saying it's true, but the result of the moon landings and everything up to this point has only greatly benefitted them all.

I am actually still not sure about the moon landing..
I WANT to believe they did it, but part of me always feels it was staged in parts.
I'd equate walking on the moon with jesus walking on water..

You'd think the whole world would have changed overnight...

Originally posted by magma
reply to post by OutonaLimb

 

There is nothing in your last post that provides proof

You will not be able to produce it

Yip. Nothing to (conveniently) see there, I'm sure.
What a quick reader you are - it took you two minutes to absorb a whole intricate pdf
presentation before commenting.

When you want to believe so badly, nothing (even the cold harsh truth) will convince you otherwise.

Well you could try to only quote the parts that apply. Like I did. You have nothing. Admid it.

No ones' been the moon and no one ever will in our life time. That I'm positive of.

reply to post by OutonaLimb


What about pictures of the ISS? The ATS member ngchunter actually took photos of it...and posted them here.

So NASA "faked" it all. Seemed real to me as my father worked at the "Cape" from 1965-1974.
i have met Neal Armstrong and many more astronauts, he did not strike me as a liar but a meek, quite,
shy man. Seeing the fear in my dad's eye's at countdown turn to hope and prayer after first stage separation,
his breath held until the capsule reached orbit then a flood of tears. That was the first time i saw my dad cry,
you can't fake that. Nor change what is known by many that was there, the truth.

reply to post by OutonaLimb

Yes. Each and every one. Have you any comment on the cold welding phenomena?

Really?....you think the ISS has been hoaxed?.....I think you need to get out a little bit more

In what way has it been hoaxed?

As to cold welding there are plenty of scientists who consider it to be nothing more than a myth when attributed to space craft.