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.

 

MOON: First Keep Out Zones now National Parks for Apollo Sites?

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2013 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Here's your laser satellite. LADEE www.nasa.gov...




posted on Jul, 18 2013 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


And you came up with weapons grade lasers from that? I'm impressed.



posted on Jul, 18 2013 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


And you came up with weapons grade lasers from that? I'm impressed.


There is payload on LADEE that will be for "testing" of high bandwidth laser communications. Multiple , high-powered lasers.

edit to supply links
NASA's First Laser Communication System Integrated, Ready for Launch
March 14, 2013
www.nasa.gov...
edit on 7/18/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2013 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


A high powered communication laser has nothing on a weapons laser. They are completely different types of systems. A com laser won't damage a satellite as even the high powered ones are much lower powered than a weapons laser. But let me guess, Howard Hughes came up with it so it's a weapon, right? Or is it a laser is a laser is a laser?



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Zaphod, I think you were the one who introduced the phraseology of "weapons grade" lasers, while I have been saying, simply and continuously, in this thread, "laser weapons."


A level of 100 kilowatts is considered the gateway for weapons grade lasers. Source www.nationaldefensemagazine.org...


But what if we have [just for example] one satellite with 8 different lasers adding up to [just for example] ~95kw. That would be approaching the "weapons grade" laser threshold.


Commercial single-mode lasers have reached 10 kW in CW power. Source www.laserfocusworld.com...



This industrial product also has applications in tactical directed energy markets. The combination of ten kilowatts of output power with near-perfect beam quality and the inherent reliability, efficiency and ruggedness of a fiber laser in a compact package is a compelling solution for a variety of tactical directed energy applications. www.laserfocusworld.com...


How do the lasers on LADEE compare? Looks like it has 4 laser telescopes of 10w each.


There is also a technology demonstration, the Lunar Laser Communication Demonstration, designed to demonstrate a new method of sending and receiving data from missions using lasers rather than radio signals. The lasercom from Earth to lunar orbit will have a down link data rate of 622 Mb/s, compared to our current methods, which only get about 100 Mb/s



Spacecraft Power: 295 W



The transmitter system comprises four 15-cm co-boresighted telescopes on a single gimbal. Each telescope transmits up to 10 Watts, and carries a dedicated camera for spatial acquisition and tracking. Source dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-disseminate/1721.1/61673


That's not even close to "weapons grade" lasers. However, it is probably enough to disable an enemy satellite that was sniffing too close to the moon. ZAP! ZAP!



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


No, it really isn't. A low power laser like a communications laser wouldn't even warm up a satellite, let alone disable it. I say weapons grade laser, because if you're going to destroy a satellite, or anything, you need power. Communications lasers don't have that kind of power.

LADEE doesn't even come close to being able to disable a satellite. Even if you fired all the lasers at it, that's only 40w of power. You have to look at the range involved, the power, the material you're trying to cut through, and a number of other factors. You can use a 40w laser (or less) to cut through 1/8" acrylic at very close range, but if you were at longer range, even in space, you'd see a decrease in power. You also would have to be able to target all four lasers on the exact same spot, which isn't easy to do.



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Granted these laser weapons do not need to be powerful enough to cut through any spacecraft shielding but only to stay focussed long enough to cause heat flux differentials that would put payloads out of tolerance, like blinding the star sensors, disrupting antenna circuitry, "targeted and directed energy applications" rings a bell?



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


The power level, even of all four lasers together, if you could get them all on exactly the same spot, would require an extremely long time on that one spot on any lens before it would begin to damage it. Two objects traveling in orbit would have to be in identical orbits for the amount of time it would require to damage a sensor, if it even could. It all depends on the type of laser, the frequency, and other factors.



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Agreed on the laser power problem. You think the LADEE lasers would be too underpowered. I think the LADEE lasers could still be utilized as a laser weapon. Space warfare doctrine has been studied and tested. Disabling the enemy satellite by this manner, laser blinding or over heating, would be allowed by the NASA Administrator and the Secretary of the Interior, under Bill 2617, if it passes, the law would say to "preserve and protect".

How far would they go to protect Nixon's Apollo? They will go so far to direct asteroids at the moon to obliterate the Apollo landing sites. Simply. They will simply wipe out these sites in order to "preserve and protect" them.

I'm sure Fox News and CNN are working on the details of the Asteroid Apocalypse. Probably Titanic director James Cameron has been consulting with NASA. And Charles Bolden has been successful so far with the holding action Keep Out Zones. This is all a part of the Carol Rosin/Werner von Braun moon disclosure conspiracy theory.



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


So not only are they going to use 10w lasers to destroy other satellites, they can direct asteroids too huh? What CAN'T they do? Oh yeah, apparently land on the moon.



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Are you not aware that asteroids are a big thing now?



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


Gee, why would that be? Oh, yeah. Because we'd like to know one is going to hit us, because they tend to do things like wipe out life as we know it. Oh wait, are they as fake as the moon landing too?



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 11:15 PM
link   
Again with the lunacy. Apollo has been proven fact over and over again and the HB's have had several decades time to come up even with a single piece of evidence to suggest a hoax. Same as here, assumptions, conjecture, jumping at conclusions etc. but still no evidence. The keep out zones are so close to the sites that if you want you can go in and take close up shots of the area. Hardly a "cover up". You might as well claim that since white house has a fence around it and you cant go any closer that must mean it's not really there.



posted on Jul, 20 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Science still requires that the Apollo results be reproduced independently. Until you can show that the results CAN be reproduced independently Apollo is merely a claim, made during the Nixon era and that belongs in the dustbins of science.

Unfortunately most Apollo Defenders take a faith based approach to the Apollo science dogma. You are willing to accept any figures published by any scientist at any time in the last 41 years so long as they prove Apollo. That's not how science works.

It is very good situation for the Apollo Investigators. Our standing is that we demand independently reproduced scientific results! There are no comparable US, USSR, Russian, Indian, Chinese or Japanese missions in 41 years.

You have rested your entire Apollo Mythology on the Nixon Years and one thing I know about Apollo defenders is that they always underestimate the man....

edit on 7/20/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: edits



posted on Jul, 20 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   
You write as if other nations haven't conducted their own space programs and scientific research.
Feel free to post the scientific research that doesn't support apollo. And need I remind you that posting YT videos from an australian retard doesn't qualify as anything. Actual peer reviewed reports.



posted on Jul, 20 2013 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
You write as if other nations haven't conducted their own space programs and scientific research.
Feel free to post the scientific research that doesn't support apollo. And need I remind you that posting YT videos from an australian retard doesn't qualify as anything. Actual peer reviewed reports.


No. NASA made the claims 41 years ago.. It's none of my business why you choose to defend those ridiculous claims because those claims still cannot be independently reproduced. You are living in the dark ages of 1960's cold war Tv fantasies. In fact, NASA hasn't even soft landed on the moon since 1972....

Wow! Howard Hughes was still alive back then


Every year it looks worse and worse for NASA as nobody DARES to launch a human mission outside low earth orbit - even for 15 minutes! It's never a matter of money. It's only a matter of will. If the technology exists there are willful humans on this planet who would really enjoy that ride. The fact is, nobody DARES.

Nobody DARES to venture forth outside low earth orbit because the human race is weak and pathetic compared to what's out there in space.

As the foreign lunar missions come closer to launch window NASA keeps escalating the warning language with regard to the Nixon/ Apollo HOAX sites. You can't deny that NASA is escalating now. "Preserve" and "Protect" will be the law if the pending HR 2617 gets passed by the congress. They will shoot down or disable any satellite that doesn't play by NASA's rules on the moon.




posted on Jul, 21 2013 @ 02:54 AM
link   
No? So you make the claim but refuse to back it up? You give up that easily? Or could it perhaps be that there isn't anything to back up your claim?



posted on Jul, 21 2013 @ 03:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlchemistSwami
they would (with the authority of this bill) simply DETAIN the individual indefinitely upon return, and subject them to what ever punishment they deemed fit the the "crime" of trespassing on the Moon.


So yanks are not allowed to visit any National Historical Park? Exactly where in the bill does it say anyone cannot visit the moon - oh, you have not even bothered to read the proposed bill, you are just posting crap, like the op!


I genuinely disagree with your statement and would expect this bill to be completely enforceable


So what happens to people that visit a National Historical Park now? Are they arrested?


Maybe I am wrong?


no maybe's about it, you are wrong.



posted on Jul, 21 2013 @ 05:06 AM
link   
This is all meaningless. The Chinese will go to the moon (its on their plan and they are currently working the plan). I imagine they'll land in the same place as Apollo so that can put a Chinese Flag right next to the USA one and take a photo.

Its too good a propaganda opportunity to miss and the USA will be able to do nothing about it.



posted on Jul, 21 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
No? So you make the claim but refuse to back it up? You give up that easily? Or could it perhaps be that there isn't anything to back up your claim?


Here's the bill which you probably did not read:


(4) the Apollo lunar program was one of the greatest achievements in American history;


Here's the Neil Armstrong quote from your dreams:
"Thats one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

Maybe you should read the fine print of the bill HR 2617?

(2) APOLLO LUNAR LANDING SITES.—The term
15 ‘‘Apollo lunar landing sites’’ means all areas of the
16 Moon where astronauts and instruments connected
17 to the Apollo program between 1969 and 1972
18 touched the lunar surface.


Do you know what that means? Every crash site, every Surveyors, every SIVb stage, every hunk of trash "connected to the Apollo program", which is going to include all the Rangers, every LO, and all top secret crash sites or landing sites, and they will probably claim to have "instruments" in locations where they don't really have instruments but want to keep that area clear anyway. Oh, NASA


Fundamentally, you have taken this legal action for granted. You are not aware of the implications and how this action will be understood throughout the rest of the world, mainly by those other space fairing nations.

This is commercial encroachment. (The US being a federal corporation, uniform commercial codes, etc) other nations will follow suit and there will be a cut-up of "territories" on the moon. Corporations will loot the resources and leave their excrement behind, like the Apollo program did, according to your own mythology.

Now do you see how Neil Armstrong's word are ringing HOLLOW?

Maybe his words are hollow because the moon is hollow? Or is the moon a holo-gram?

NASA is covetous of the moon. Why is it greedy? Why is it so protective? What did Richard Nixon and Howard Hughes really find up there? Proof that the moon had been visited once before, from Earth?


edit on 7/21/2013 by SayonaraJupiter because: fix tags



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join