What a brilliant idea. Cheerio Moon Man and all your grandiose claims of utter nonsense!

__________________
Of all the things I've ever lost, I miss my mind the most!

Don't worry. They happened.

One of my earliest memories is that of my dad running over my little red fire truck in the driveway with his car when I was even younger. I'll never forget it.

How many times are you going to say good bye and then return..?

I bet you post in this thread again.

Well I was only just born at the time of Apollo 17 and the first real space mission for me was Columbia's 1st launch in 1981. So far I haven't seen anything new in Moon Man's claims and virtually everything he has said has been blatently wrong. I'm not holding my breath that it'll improve at all.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

Yeah. I think we can do this thread pretty well, even without Jay.

__________________
"Flying in space is risky business, but just staying on this planet is risky business too." - John Young, astronaut

Do you leave the life jackets off your boat just because the last time you went boating you didn't need the lifejackets..?

How does adding a 10,000 lb thruster and only using 3000 lb of thrust reduce deceleration time..?

They would've used the entire 10,000 lbs of thrust if reducing deceleration was the reason.

I look forward to it. The reason I haven't started posting yet was to get rid of the usual trolls, such as your buddy.

Well, we're all still waiting for some direct evidence that the lunar landings didn't occur. Saying "it's not possible" is all fine and well, but it's not proof of your claim.

__________________
Rest enough for the individual man -- too much, and too soon -- and we call it death. But for Man, no rest and no ending. He must go on, conquest beyond conquest. First this little planet with its winds and ways, and then all the laws of mind and matter that restrain him. Then the planets about him and at last out across immensity to the stars. And when he has conquered all the deeps of space and all the mysteries of time, still he will be beginning.

They did use it when the LM was heavier with propellants in earlier stages of PDI and in DOI burns.

Really I have no idea why you seem to think that the arm is some sort of "life jacket." Just because it was used (actually come to think about it, it may have been the ISS's arm) to help do repairs on the last Shuttle Mission doesn't mean that it was ever intended to used in that way on previous missions. If NASA was planning to blow up the Columbia, then why go to the expense of spending millions of dollars on refurbishing it with a brand new Space Science Lab, one that was supposed to rescue a flagging Space Shuttle program. Your claims just don't make sense.

The LM engine was able to be throttled back because a rocket engine uses fuel. Hence the craft gets lighter and so the thrust has to drop to keep the force pushing the craft up the same. This is pretty obvious with a little thought

Other than that all you have done is hand wave and prevaricate and as of yet have come up with nothing new. In fact all you have done so far is prove how little you know about the space program, how rockets work, and how shockingly bad your research skills are. Not at all a way to impress us. Let me remind you. You aren’t dealing with Joe Public down the pub here; you are dealing with Scientists, Engineers and Space Enthusiasts who know the history and the way these things work better than 99% of people out there. You can’t just bluff and hand wave your way through this because we know when you're making stuff up.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

Have you ever answered someone before they finished their question to you?

Example:

Parent: "Are you going to clean up..."
Child: "Yeah, after the show is over!"

See the 2002 Bad Astronomy thread, "Apollo Radio Conversations."

They allegedly only used 3000 lbs thrust on Apollo 11 and had a 10,000 lb thuster on the lander. This was the first mission so how did they know they could get away with only using 3000 lbs of thrust when NASA designed the lander to use 10,000 lbs..?

How come we can't hear the thruster at all when they're landing but we can hear Armstrong talking clear as a bell..?

How come we can hear the thruster when they take off from the moon..?

How must tempature/heat does 3000 lbs of thrust create..?

These are open questions to any of the experts on here.

Personally im still waiting for something i havent heard before and especially something that hasnt been found to be incorrect.

How exactly its the canadarm a lifeline anyway?
Im assuming you mean if an astronaut on EVA somehow floats of it could be used. I have no idea if this ever was a plan or is even feasable but you could just move the shuttle to get them within range of another astronaut on eva if the arm wasnt present.
If you mean an arm to inspect the shuttle then thats a rather recent concept anyway.

To put it in other terms: 10,000 lbs to decelerate. 3,000 lbs to hover. You don't use the hover setting if you want to slow down, do you? Besides, the LM was heavier in the early stages of the deceleration, so more thrust was needed then.

__________________
"We do not require reality to conform to the expectations of the ignorant"

It was the 3rd flight of the lm. The lm had been flown in earth orbit on apollo9 and lunar orbit down to 50000ft above the surface on apollo 10. A descent profile had been calculated so the required thrust was well known.

You can hear Armstrong because the rocket is firing in a vacuum. Most of the noise of a rocket is its interaction with the air which of course is not in any abundance in space. Also were the astronauts using noise cancelling microphones?
Ive not heard the thrust on lift off personally but perhaps any noise is in the initial burst as the engine interacts with the surface its lifting from. this noise would die away fairly fast.

4th actually. There was an unmanned test flight in EO on Apollo 5.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

You've yet to establish that the arm is a lifeline, so your comparison to a lifejacket is spurious.

Tell us exactly why it's a lifeline and how it's been used in that capacity in the past.

You don't understand the utility of having an engine that can be throttled? Do you always drive your car at full speed or at a crawl?

Why? Do planes land at full power? Do boats pull into docks at full power? Do you enter your garage at full power?

This is not a very auspicious start for someone claiming to disprove the moon landings. You've made numerous factual errors that could easily have been checked. It appears you haven't studied spaceflight of any kind in much detail. So far you've only regurgitated the same worn and threadbare arguments that have been repeatedly shotdown here and in other forums.

Where's the originality? Where's the killer argument?

Let's see some real analysis of why Apollo didn't happen. So far all you have demonstrated is your ignorance.

__________________
"A mystic is a person who is puzzled before the obvious but who understands the nonexistent." -- Elbert Hubbard

Moon Man, welcome to the board. Your third word on this thread was "prove", yet after two pages you've given us no proof whatsoever, just a whole lot of questions, most of which have been thoroughly debunked in this forum and on others, yet you said in post No. 3 that your evidence would not be the same old stuff that's been completely discredited and you would bring new evidence/arguments to the table. Please do!! But please also, real proof, real evidence, not just questions.

If nobody ever orbited the moon (let alone landed on it) how do you explain the many photos (taken with hand-held cameras) of Tsiolkovsky crater on the back of the moon where it can never be seen from Earth? How about all the movie or TV film, that was obviously taken with hand-held cameras, of locations on the moon that are being viewed from positions completely different to the view from Earth?

For instance, the movie clip of the Apollo 11 command module orbiting above craters Tarantius G and Tarantius H. The craters are seen from directly above, but being at nearly 50 degrees east on the moon, they are only ever seen obliquely from Earth. This clip can be viewed on Spacecraft Films' Apollo 11 DVD Disc No. 3, "Onboard Film" / "CSM from LM", at 0:01:42 to 0:02:27. It can also be seen for 13 seconds in the movie "The Flight of Apollo 11: Eagle Has Landed" (which is available on many DVDs) at about 8 minutes 1 second from the beginning.

How about the many hundreds (if not thousands) of photos of other easily identifiable lunar locations that have been taken from angles very different to the view from Earth? Remember, there is very strong evidence that many of them were taken with hand-held (not robotic) cameras.

By the way, the usual hoax-believer modus operandi is to dart from one issue or question to another, never thrashing out only one topic at a time, rarely acknowledging other posters' arguments, and never admitting oneself was wrong. You won't be guilty of doing those things, will you?

<Fixed typos>

I need an expert to answer these questions for me.

How much fuel was on the lander during Apollo 11..?

What kind of batteries were used in the lunar lander..?

How many batteries were used..?

Were they recharged while the astro-nots were on the moon..?

If so, how..?

Did they add more and more batteries for each flight, or did every mission contain the same amount of batteries..?

The full 10,000 lbs of thrust was used at the beginning of powered descent to decelerate from orbital velocity. As the LM slowed down and approached the surface, not as much thrust was needed because (1) the deceleration rate was greatly reduced since the LM had already shed most of its velocity, and (2) the LM burned off most of its propellant so its mass was much less requiring less force.

Moon Man, these are basic things that you could easily learn on your own with a little bit of research. I though you said you were going to present something original. So far you're only regurgitating the same tired old stuff.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

Since it's beyond the scope of my knowledge to debunk your claims, I'd just like you to stop calling the astronauts "astro-nots". This is just a friendly tip, since resorting to ad hominem attacks is not recommended, especially on this board.

__________________
here we go, the world is spinning
when it stops, it's just beginning

sun comes up, we laugh and we cry
sun goes down, and then we all die

Touched by his noodly appendage

Have a look here for some real data on the how the LM descent/ascent was planned and executed. You obviously haven't bother to read up on this.

I thought you were the expert who was going to show us why Apollo couldn't happen? Why do we have to educate you?

__________________
"A mystic is a person who is puzzled before the obvious but who understands the nonexistent." -- Elbert Hubbard

[Expletive deleted by moderator]! You think you can prove Apollo was faked and yet you don't even know these basic things about the spacecraft. How arrogant you are.

__________________
Webmaster, Rocket & Space Technology

Why do you need an expert? All of the information you have just asked can be readily found with a trip through Google. (Though I'm sure that some mad loony here will do the research for you.)

Surely you should already know all of this before coming here and claiming to be able to prove Apollo fake? It really is the basic research that you should have already done, but you seem to expect us to do your leg work for you. Another pretty typical HB trait.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

The LM carried about 10000KG of fuel. 8000 in the descent stage 2000 in the ascent stage.

I thought you were the expert who was going to show us the error of our ways?

This is all publicly available information. Most, if not all, of this information is available on the web. Why didn't you seek to educate yourself before posting here?

__________________
"A mystic is a person who is puzzled before the obvious but who understands the nonexistent." -- Elbert Hubbard

I say it again: They did use it when the LM was heavier with propellants in earlier stages of PDI and in DOI burns.

I didn't explain those acronyms because I was hoping it would encourage you to do some research of your own. Those are important bits of information to understand if you're going to make any claims about the use of rocket engines on Apollo missions. So please, go study the matter a bit further and return when you have better understanding of the issues at hand.

I can recommend some websites where you can start:
Apollo Flight Journal
Apollo Lunar Surface Journal
Apollo Saturn Reference Page
And some others at NASA History Division
NASA History Publications On-Line
NASA History Topical Index

Hello again and thanks for the welcome Kiwi. I haven't even began to give my original proof. I expected to be trolled so I thought it best to let the trolls get there kicks in before I start. I'm one person and getting responses from 10 or more. I encorage that but it's nearly impossible to keep up.

Well, start giving it! We're just replying to kill time while you assemble your proof!

__________________
here we go, the world is spinning
when it stops, it's just beginning

sun comes up, we laugh and we cry
sun goes down, and then we all die

Touched by his noodly appendage

Well given that it's nearly 5am I'm ging to bed, even though this thread is a little like watching a train wreak. I'm sure it'll provide plenty of screams and frustrated head banging for me tomorrow as I read through the wreakage.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran