Could it Have been done? - Page 5

AGN Fuel · #**121** (**permalink**) 21-September-2005, 04:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by genebujold

I'm surprised no one thought of the obvious:

Put a tape recorder aboard an unmanned ship, with a pre-recorded three-day loop, and simply synchronize it with a similar one on the ground. "Time delays" could have built in ahead of time, during the recording.

Except of course that the astronauts & Capcom often discussed that day's current affairs & events during the TLC & TEC. So, unless they were able to predict the scores of sporting events days in advance......

ZaphodBeeblebrox · #**122** (**permalink**) 21-September-2005, 05:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AGN Fuel

Except of course that the astronauts & Capcom often discussed that day's current affairs & events during the TLC & TEC. So, unless they were able to predict the scores of sporting events days in advance......

Why, Do I Have an Impulse, to SING, The Following:

We do! (The Stonecutters Song)

All: Who controls the British crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do! We do!

Karl: Who leaves Atlantis off the maps?
Lenny: Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
Alien: We do! We do!

All: Who holds back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Gutenberg a star?
We do! We do!

Skinner: Who robs cavefish of their sight?
Homer: Who rigs every Oscar night?
All: We do! We do!

Peter B · #**123** (**permalink**) 22-September-2005, 01:36 AM

I did some research on this matter a couple of weeks ago for the Apollohoax board. For me, the trickiest thing to arrange ahead of time were the golf scores. Let me explain.

On one of the Apollo missions, the Capcom relayed scores from the first day of a golf tournament. How are you going to be able to know ahead of time that Arnold Palmer would card a 70, or Jack Nicklaus a 73. Alternatively, how can you physically ensure that they card the score that's required of them? Even if they were willing to go along with the trickery, sinking that last 10 foot putt to get the right score would be a little hard.

ZaphodBeeblebrox · #**124** (**permalink**) 22-September-2005, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter B

I did some research on this matter a couple of weeks ago for the Apollohoax board. For me, the trickiest thing to arrange ahead of time were the golf scores. Let me explain.

On one of the Apollo missions, the Capcom relayed scores from the first day of a golf tournament. How are you going to be able to know ahead of time that Arnold Palmer would card a 70, or Jack Nicklaus a 73. Alternatively, how can you physically ensure that they card the score that's required of them? Even if they were willing to go along with the trickery, sinking that last 10 foot putt to get the right score would be a little hard.

The Stonecutters, Have their Ways ...

We're EVERYWHERE!!!!

Gryfin210 · #**125** (**permalink**) 29-September-2005, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter B

I did some research on this matter a couple of weeks ago for the Apollohoax board. For me, the trickiest thing to arrange ahead of time were the golf scores. Let me explain.

On one of the Apollo missions, the Capcom relayed scores from the first day of a golf tournament. How are you going to be able to know ahead of time that Arnold Palmer would card a 70, or Jack Nicklaus a 73. Alternatively, how can you physically ensure that they card the score that's required of them? Even if they were willing to go along with the trickery, sinking that last 10 foot putt to get the right score would be a little hard.

Simple. Rig the tourny. If it looks like a games going to end with too low of a score, distract the players. Or get a psychic to predict the result of game. Lol!

Maybe I missed something, but why are we bothering with pre-recording the transmissions? If you can work out the time delay, which I think we can, then fine. If you can't, then tell everyone the spacecraft stores all outgoing telemetry in a ~1.5 second buffer before transmission. The Ruskys might raise a few eyebrowse, but I don't think that it could other wise be disproved.

Peter B · #**126** (**permalink**) 30-September-2005, 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gryfin210

Maybe I missed something, but why are we bothering with pre-recording the transmissions? If you can work out the time delay, which I think we can, then fine. If you can't, then tell everyone the spacecraft stores all outgoing telemetry in a ~1.5 second buffer before transmission. The Ruskys might raise a few eyebrowse, but I don't think that it could other wise be disproved.

Yes, you're missing something. You're missing the fact that during the missions, the dishes were pointed at the Moon, and thus got their signals from the vicinity of the Moon. The people working at two of these stations were subject matter experts. The idea that someone might be able to make a signal appear to come from the Moon when it was actually coming from Area 51 without the tracking station staff realising it are vanishly small. In other words, if there was any faking involved, it would have to include just about everyone at all the tracking stations.

So if you want to fake the mission, you can either pre-record it and have a bogus signal sent from the right place, or you can have the right sort of signals coming from the wrong place. There's no way you can have the right sort of signal coming from the right place - unless the missions are actually happening.

AGN Fuel · #**127** (**permalink**) 30-September-2005, 05:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter B

Yes, you're missing something. You're missing the fact that during the missions, the dishes were pointed at the Moon, and thus got their signals from the vicinity of the Moon. The people working at two of these stations were subject matter experts. The idea that someone might be able to make a signal appear to come from the Moon when it was actually coming from Area 51 without the tracking station staff realising it are vanishly small. In other words, if there was any faking involved, it would have to include just about everyone at all the tracking stations.

Speaking of which, PeterB - I'm taking the family to Bega on Monday for the week to visit some relos. Seeing we will be driving past Honeysuckle Creek on the way down, I'm going to take the wife & sprogs to the site for a bit of a look around.

Just thought I'd mention it in case you happened to be in the vicinity.

Peter B · #**128** (**permalink**) 30-September-2005, 05:20 AM

Alas Mr Fuel, I'll be wargaming on the Monday on the northside of Canberra, well away from your intended path. However, if you have time for a brief meal-stop in Canberra, let me know.

Peter B · #**129** (**permalink**) 30-September-2005, 05:36 AM

And, silly me, I hope you have a great time at the Honeysuckle site.

For those who haven't been there, it's out in the hills about 40 kilometres south-west of Canberra, surrounded by native vegetation, with the chance to see lots of birds and the occasional kangaroo.

Gryfin210 · #**130** (**permalink**) 03-October-2005, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter B

Yes, you're missing something. You're missing the fact that during the missions, the dishes were pointed at the Moon, and thus got their signals from the vicinity of the Moon. The people working at two of these stations were subject matter experts. The idea that someone might be able to make a signal appear to come from the Moon when it was actually coming from Area 51 without the tracking station staff realising it are vanishly small. In other words, if there was any faking involved, it would have to include just about everyone at all the tracking stations.

Umm, but the signal is coming from the moon, after being relayed by the spacecraft. The transmision comes from Area 51 (probably in the form of a laser beam), then gets picked up by the spacecraft in lunar orbit.

Quote:

So if you want to fake the mission, you can either pre-record it and have a bogus signal sent from the right place, or you can have the right sort of signals coming from the wrong place. There's no way you can have the right sort of signal coming from the right place - unless the missions are actually happening.

I suppose it might be possible to send extra unmanned Surveyor type missions to the moon as relays. Apollo 12 perhaps could have used Surveyor 3 as its relay, but the others would have required unmanned landings

Peter B · #**131** (**permalink**) 04-October-2005, 01:52 AM

Okay, so if the signal is relayed via the Moon, there will be a delay, while the signal travels from the Earth to the Moon, and then back again. In other words, the astronauts in Area 51 say something, the signal travels to the Moon, and then back to Mission Control in Houston. The people in Mission Control will therefore hear it 2.6 seconds or so after it's spoken. That determines how quickly they can respond to something they hear.

But when you listen to the astronauts talking with Mission Control, the response time is much less - around 1.3 seconds, the time it takes for the signal to travel one way.

PhantomWolf · #**132** (**permalink**) 04-October-2005, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gryfin210

Umm, but the signal is coming from the moon, after being relayed by the spacecraft. The transmision comes from Area 51 (probably in the form of a laser beam), then gets picked up by the spacecraft in lunar orbit.

What happens when it goes behind the moon?

genebujold · #**133** (**permalink**) 07-October-2005, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter B

I did some research on this matter a couple of weeks ago for the Apollohoax board. For me, the trickiest thing to arrange ahead of time were the golf scores. Let me explain.

On one of the Apollo missions, the Capcom relayed scores from the first day of a golf tournament. How are you going to be able to know ahead of time that Arnold Palmer would card a 70, or Jack Nicklaus a 73. Alternatively, how can you physically ensure that they card the score that's required of them? Even if they were willing to go along with the trickery, sinking that last 10 foot putt to get the right score would be a little hard.

I've heard rumors that the woo-woos were up to their tricks before the Apollo missions ever took off, and that CAPCOM was given the go-ahead to include unpredictable data in the transmissions as a protection of sorts against the woo-woos claiming that the lunar missions were faked.

Thus, the evidence of golf scores, or any WEATHER INFO, is a tell-tale sign that the off-station (ie, Earth) signals were NOT faked, and that the Lunar Missions did, in fact, happen.

Why absolute idiots continue to contend otherwise in the face of insurmountable evidence to the contrary is absolutely beyond me!

JayUtah · #**134** (**permalink**) 10-October-2005, 10:17 PM

The transmision comes from Area 51 (probably in the form of a laser beam)...

Want to explain how that was possible in 1969?

...then gets picked up by the spacecraft in lunar orbit.

What happens when the spacecraft goes behind the moon? What happens when the Earth turns Area 51 away from the moon?

JMV · #**135** (**permalink**) 10-October-2005, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter B

Okay, so if the signal is relayed via the Moon, there will be a delay, while the signal travels from the Earth to the Moon, and then back again. In other words, the astronauts in Area 51 say something, the signal travels to the Moon, and then back to Mission Control in Houston. The people in Mission Control will therefore hear it 2.6 seconds or so after it's spoken. That determines how quickly they can respond to something they hear.

But when you listen to the astronauts talking with Mission Control, the response time is much less - around 1.3 seconds, the time it takes for the signal to travel one way.

This can't be right. Recording was done on Earth at Mission Control's end. When Mission Control says something it is recorded right there and then. Signal travels 1.3 seconds to the moon. Astronaut responds to it and it takes 1.3 seconds for the signal to get to the Earth where the response is recorded. There's a 2.6 second delay with astronaut's response to Mission Control's words and no delay for whatever Mission Control says in the recordings.

In this hypothetical hoax, if the signal was relayed via the moon both ways, there would be a 5.2 second delay for astronaut's responses. But if the actors on Earth in Area 51 got the transmissions from Mission Control directly without going to the moon first and only the responses where relayed via the moon the delay would be about 2.6 seconds. I suppose it doesn't take too long for a signal to get from Houston to Groom Lake.

Gryfin210 · #**136** (**permalink**) 11-October-2005, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMV

This can't be right. Recording was done on Earth at Mission Control's end. When Mission Control says something it is recorded right there and then. Signal travels 1.3 seconds to the moon. Astronaut responds to it and it takes 1.3 seconds for the signal to get to the Earth where the response is recorded. There's a 2.6 second delay with astronaut's response to Mission Control's words and no delay for whatever Mission Control says in the recordings.

In this hypothetical hoax, if the signal was relayed via the moon both ways, there would be a 5.2 second delay for astronaut's responses. But if the actor's on Earth in Area 51 got the transmissions from Mission Control directly without going to the moon first and only the responses where relayed via the moon the delay would be about 2.6 seconds. I suppose it doesn't take too long for a signal to get from Houston to Groom Lake.

Thanks, JMV, I had thought the same thing. Assuming the A51 to Houston comm. time to be virtualy zero, it should be doable, but still complex. Now, I don't know if we had sensors capable of picking up laser signals in 1969, but if we did, then it might work.

Peter B · #**137** (**permalink**) 12-October-2005, 12:20 AM

You still have to explain what happens when the spacecraft orbiting the Moon goes behind the Moon, and what happens when the Earth turns on its axis, putting Area 51 on the far side to the Moon.

JayUtah · #**138** (**permalink**) 12-October-2005, 05:22 PM

Now, I don't know if we had sensors capable of picking up laser signals in 1969, but if we did, then it might work.

If you pulsed the laser, 1969 sensors might detect a few photons from 250,000 miles away -- but not nearly enough to use it to send a signal -- especially an analog-modulated voice signal.

And please discuss the problems deriving from the orbits and rotations. Area 51 will have line-of-sight to the moon for only a few hours every day.

JMV · #**139** (**permalink**) 12-October-2005, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayUtah

Area 51 will have line-of-sight to the moon for only a few hours every day.

But so does Houston. Why would it be more problematic for Area 51 than for Houston from orbital mechanics' stand point?

JayUtah · #**140** (**permalink**) 12-October-2005, 10:57 PM

Any one point on Earth has this limitation. That's why the MSFN uses several stations at various longitudes. But Gryfin210 has only one alleged laser station at Area 51.

JMV · #**141** (**permalink**) 12-October-2005, 11:33 PM

Oh, we were talking about lasers, excluding all other methods. Then it doesn't work.

I was aware of how tracking and communications were done on Apollo missions, but my line of thought was, if Houston can keep contact with astronauts on the moon at all times (via tracking stations in California, Spain and Australia) then why couldn't Area 51 keep contact with an unmanned spacecraft using similar techniques.

But of course, if only one laser station at Area 51 is allowed in our thought experiment, it would be impossible.

genebujold · #**142** (**permalink**) 14-October-2005, 04:32 AM

And Area 51, although in a desert, is by no means void of cloud cover, particularly in the winter!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode