Did man "Really" Land on the Moon

Yes.

Yes

Yes

Yes. Close the thread.

No.. why haven't we been back

Maybe

No defies human logic which would be for other countries to have gone too

cockneyclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 4:18 pm

No.. why haven't we been back

We've been back. 12 people have walked on the moon.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Pah. We've yet to breach The Ice Walls on our disc.

Yes

wbfc wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 4:20 pm

No defies human logic which would be for other countries to have gone too

Other countries don’t have a budget quite like America does to not only for the mission itself but that sheer number of engineers/scientists etc needed to not only build and fly the damn thing but do all the prototyping & testing/refinement along the way

One of the reasons they haven’t been back so much is that the tech is ‘lost’ - specific molds for various parts gone etc and there isn’t much need to try and rebuild them all

No wonder they had so much trouble finding Nemo...

Yes. Ironically because if we hadn’t we would be trying now. The moon was a bit of a boring disappointment all in all. Not even made of cheese.

Yes. If you have a strong enough telescope you can see the stuff left behind from the Apollo missions.

4:20 wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 4:26 pm

Pah. We've yet to breach The Ice Walls on our disc.

EtVXo13UcAMkho6.jpeg

...but fortunately we managed to map beyond the ice walls very accurately.

Yes - the reason we haven’t been back is pretty simple, it’s expensive and incredibly dangerous. In fact I’m not sure why we are going back, when it comes to science there’s not much there we can do that we can’t do on ISS.

Yes.

Yes

SirBob wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 4:34 pm

Yes - the reason we haven’t been back is pretty simple, it’s expensive and incredibly dangerous. In fact I’m not sure why we are going back, when it comes to science there’s not much there we can do that we can’t do on ISS.

Something to do with nuclear fusion is an enticing factor I believe. They're looking into mining the moon.

In the far flung future the moon will be like swiss cheese.
Right now it's still like cheddar.

Yes.
They could have faked it once, but the sheer number of people involved meant it would have leaked out very quickly.
Faking 6 landings was just not possible.
Also at the height of the cold war, everything was tracked, and the Apollo missions were tracked all the way there and back.

Rowls wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 4:38 pm

Something to do with nuclear fusion is an enticing factor I believe. They're looking into mining the moon.

In the far flung future the moon will be like swiss cheese.
Right now it's still like cheddar.

Ah yes of course. Thing is tho it’s just a pipe dream at this point, there’s been no real progress at all in that field at all and I don’t think there ever will be in our lifetimes if at all.

Don’t get me wrong I’d absolutely love a moon base and think it’s a great idea, not for any practical use!! Just think it would be cool

SirBob wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 4:50 pm

Ah yes of course. Thing is tho it’s just a pipe dream at this point, there’s been no real progress at all in that field at all and I don’t think there ever will be in our lifetimes if at all.

Big leaps forward recently with Elon musk's reusable rockets. It reduced the cost of a rocket by around 65%.

NASA estimates the cost of launches to the ISS have come down by a factor of 4 over the past 20 years.

It'll happen. Just case of when, not if.

SirBob wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 4:50 pm

Don’t get me wrong I’d absolutely love a moon base and think it’s a great idea, not for any practical use!! Just think it would be cool

It would be mega cool. It should be equipped with a gravity cannon and capable of seeing off cybermen to protect the earth.

Doubters should read:-
'A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts'

Can't imagine anyone doing so much research and going into that much detail over 500 plus pages just to try to convince anyone the moon landings were a load of oxcrap.
Good read for anybody seriously interested in the Apollo programme.

No, otherwise we'd be targeted by the Mysterons.

Yes.
Otherwise Apollo13 would never have made it to become one of the best films i've seen.

Ah, the interlude:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irg29je8G8k

Wasn’t JJ Watt on the moon holding a Chelsea shirt?

Why isn't there a McDonald's on it then?

Buxtonclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 6:41 pm

Why isn't there a McDonald's on it then?

They opened a pub on the moon but..

OK, OK, I'll get me coat.

No. The naivety of otherwise intelligent people who believe everything they get told by mainstream media astounds me.

groove wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 6:49 pm

No. The naivety of otherwise intelligent people who believe everything they get told by mainstream media astounds me.

I just Needed that Naivety to be confirmed.

My question is how did they take off for the return journey? I know gravity is less there, but still..v

Rowls wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 4:56 pm

Big leaps forward recently with Elon musk's reusable rockets. It reduced the cost of a rocket by around 65%.

NASA estimates the cost of launches to the ISS have come down by a factor of 4 over the past 20 years.

It'll happen. Just case of when, not if.

Sorry I meant no progress with fusion tech not getting back to the moon. NASA are definitely going back to the moon, don’t see SpaceX playing a major role in that tho tbh, while they are able to reuse boosters it hasn’t proven to be more cost effective, they claimed they be relaunching rockets for less than 10m dollars five + years ago, they still charge 65m + now. Just Elon Musk spin as far as I can see to boost share prices

roperclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 6:55 pm

My question is how did they take off for the return journey? I know gravity is less there, but still..v

They had a floating lunar module that hovered up to the Apollo spacecraft which was also just hovering, waiting. Either completely still or moving at exactly the same speed. An extraordinary feat for what was nothing more than a giant firework.

Gerry Hattrick wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 5:25 pm

Doubters should read:-
'A Man on the Moon: The Voyages of the Apollo Astronauts'

Can't imagine anyone doing so much research and going into that much detail over 500 plus pages just to try to convince anyone the moon landings were a load of oxcrap.
Good read for anybody seriously interested in the Apollo programme.

Have you not seen the takeover thread

roperclaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 6:55 pm

My question is how did they take off for the return journey? I know gravity is less there, but still..v

They had a an ascension rocket on the lunar module

The escape velocity needed to escape the atmosphere of the Moon is 2.38 km/s, while on the Earth it is about 11.2 km/s - so roughy a factor of roughly 4.7 less - not to mention that it would be much easier to achieve because the lunar module had a lot less mass than the launch module back on earth

For some comparison and a scale that we can understand more :

The Boeing 737 engines produce roughly 100 kN (kilonewtons) of thrust each, and there are usually two engines on a 737. So the total thrust produced by the engines of a Boeing 737 would be around 200 kN.

The Lunar Module (LM) had a descent engine that produced a maximum thrust of around 45 kN and an ascent engine that produced a maximum thrust of around 15 kN. So the total thrust produced by the LM engines would be around 60 kN.

Therefore, we can say that the LM engines produced about 0.3% of the thrust of the engines on a Boeing 737. However, it's important to note that the purpose and design of the engines on the LM were very different from those on a commercial airliner, and the LM was designed to operate in the vacuum of space, while a Boeing 737 operates in Earth's atmosphere.

So it's not that much of a 'gotcha' that the flat earters/conspiritards like to believe

groove wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 7:05 pm

They had a floating lunar module that hovered up to the Apollo spacecraft which was also just hovering, waiting. Either completely still or moving at exactly the same speed. An extraordinary feat for what was nothing more than a giant firework.

I sincerely hope that you're trolling - the Apollo command module was in a lunar orbit, just like how some satellites orbit earth used for telecomms (not all are geostationary - in one position above earth)

groove wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 6:49 pm

No. The naivety of otherwise intelligent people who believe everything they get told by mainstream media astounds me.

I’m sure all engineers like myself are enjoying this thread

Burnley1989 wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 7:37 pm

I’m sure all engineers like myself are enjoying this thread

It just astounds me that people can't conceptualise that things can be achieved when the science adds up but still do things like 'put on lucky socks' when Burnley have a must win fixture because 'we always win when I wear these socks'

Only one sensible reaction to this question: oh dear!

Yes (unless you're a member of the tinfoil hat brigade)

Yes.

Yes
You’d have to be pretty unhinged and living off pot noodles to think that the multiple landings were fake .

AlargeClaret wrote: ↑

Sun May 14, 2023 8:24 pm

Yes
You’d have to be pretty unhinged and living off pot noodles to think that the multiple landings were fake .

A Simple yes or NO Would have done ...Thank-you