Did we actually really land on moon?

[BADecker]

^^^ The Moon is evenly lit like an illumined disc would be, you believe in fairy tale balls. You're Cinderella on an animated cartoon amusement park ride to hell.

You are the amusement park ride. Sending people to hell with your false info is only amusement to others who know your deceptiveness.

[1715263085]

1715263085

[ðºÞæ]

"...Would a medal engineering company not be a better choice to provide steel mesh tires as Goodyear, a Rubber Company?..."

IIRC tires have steel belts.
...

Steel belted radials were just coming to reality in the years of the various Apollo missions.

No, the 1970 model Lincoln Continental Mark III was the first American-made vehicle with radial tires as standard equipment.
The Citroën 2CV came from factory with radial tires fitted in 1948 as standard.
A steel belted radial tire is nothing like a steel mesh tire where the mesh compresses to the inner-frame under load.

Four major components comprised the LRV tire's design: mesh,  tread,  inner-frame and  hub.

Is like equipping the billy cart with power steering (60lb/27kg)

The approach worked because each tire was only required to support about 60 pounds of weight (on the Moon, the equivalent of 360 pounds on Earth) and be used for a maximum of 75 miles.

Prior to the LRV the MET (Modularized Equipment Transporter) Apollo 14 did have inflated tires.

The MET was a two-wheeled vehicle with a tubular structure 86 inches long, 39 inches wide and 32 inches high when deployed ready to use on the lunar surface. The MET had a single handle for towing and has two legs to provide four-point stability at rest.

The MET was stowed during flight in the Modularized Equipment Storage Assembly (MESA) in the LM descent stage, and was used during both EVAs. Equipment was mounted on the MET for the geology traverse included the lunar hand tool carrier and the geology tools it carried, the closeup stereo camera, two 70 mm Hasselblad cameras, a 16 mm data acquisition camera, film magazines, a dispenser for sample bags, a trenching tool, work table, sample weigh bags and the Lunar Portable Magnetometer.

The MET tires were 4 inches wide and 16 inches in diameter, and were inflated with 1.5 psi nitrogen preflight. The tires were baked at 250 degrees F for 24 hours preflight to remove most of the antioxidants in the rubber. Operating limits for the MET tires are -70 deg. F to +250 deg. F.

Empty weight of the MET was 26 pounds, and the vehicle had a useful payload of about 140 pounds (Earth weight) including the lunar soil samples to be brought back to the LM from the geology traverse.

Estimated travel rate of a crewman towing the MET, as determined by tests with the 1/6-g centrifuge rig at MSC, was about 3.5 feet per second, with a one pound of pull required on level sand.

From Press Kit, Release No: 71-3K, Project: Apollo 14.

Judging by the footprints the cart is still at base and not attached to power source.

[notbatman]

^^^ I didn't realize steel belting wasn't a thing until so late in the game.

A tire company is still a good choice for making moon tires all-be-it wire mesh ones IMO. NASA's propaganda agents involved as many people and companies as possible to make parts, it was a PR stunt. For Goodyear it was an obvious advertising bonanza.

Anything involving money from your pocket and claims based on the Copernican model or heliocentrism is straight up fraud. No man has, can or will land a foot on any light in the sky.

[Spendulus]

.... claims based on the Copernican model or heliocentrism is straight up fraud. No man has, can or will land a foot on any light in the sky.

I have not seen any claims anywhere based on the Copernican models or heliocentrism. Those are completely outdated concepts. Certainly none from NASA.

"...Would a medal engineering company not be a better choice to provide steel mesh tires as Goodyear, a Rubber Company?..."

IIRC tires have steel belts.
...

Steel belted radials were just coming to reality in the years of the various Apollo missions.

No, the 1970 model Lincoln Continental Mark III was the first American-made vehicle with radial tires as standard equipment.
The Citroën 2CV came from factory with radial tires fitted in 1948 as standard.....
...

These statements are pretty consistent, moon landing in 1969, first American car with steel belted radials in 1970.

Although the Citroen in 1948, that's quite interesting.

[SummerBliss]

Ok, don't throw me into the same basket for the believers of conspiracy theories.

I believe Earth is NOT flat. I don't believe there are aliens in Area 51.

But this question is factually not very convincing and it is, did we actually land on moon in 1969.

There are many compelling evidences, facts etc that proves that indeed we landed on moon.

But even in 21st century where there an accident with Kalpana Chawla who merely went to space and came back, it sounds too good to be true that in 1969, we landed on the moon which is around 300000 kms or 186000 miles from the Earth with those time of technologies and successfully came back. Remember, the first apple computer was launched in 1976.

I'm not saying we didn't, I'm just saying that it's not really a question that can be debunked like other theories which says Earth is flat.

we did land on moon, but if we really talk about the first landing by apollo 11 I have my own doubts. there are videos and documentaries which try to prove the landing wrong and consider them as hoax. it was in time when USSR and USA were going through a cold war which was basically fought at technological front and USA was desperate to go an extra mile after USSR's successful launch of Sputnik. For more, watch such videos on youtube and you would kind of believe it as hoax too.

[Spendulus]

Ok, don't throw me into the same basket for the believers of conspiracy theories.

I believe Earth is NOT flat. I don't believe there are aliens in Area 51.

But this question is factually not very convincing and it is, did we actually land on moon in 1969.

There are many compelling evidences, facts etc that proves that indeed we landed on moon.

But even in 21st century where there an accident with Kalpana Chawla who merely went to space and came back, it sounds too good to be true that in 1969, we landed on the moon which is around 300000 kms or 186000 miles from the Earth with those time of technologies and successfully came back. Remember, the first apple computer was launched in 1976.

I'm not saying we didn't, I'm just saying that it's not really a question that can be debunked like other theories which says Earth is flat.

we did land on moon, but if we really talk about the first landing by apollo 11 I have my own doubts. there are videos and documentaries which try to prove the landing wrong and consider them as hoax. it was in time when USSR and USA were going through a cold war which was basically fought at technological front and USA was desperate to go an extra mile after USSR's successful launch of Sputnik. For more, watch such videos on youtube and you would kind of believe it as hoax too.

Well, if we didn't go to the moon, what did we do with those big fucking rockets?

[bkbirge]

[Cryptotourist]

Well, if we didn't go to the moon, what did we do with those big fucking rockets?

Dah, had to upgrade the plasma lights into LED, on the firmament/steel dome - Batty would claim.
Hallelujah.

[ðºÞæ]

Does anyone know what the urge was to pick up a rock 5 miles form base instead of just bend down and pick one up?

The other thing, weight is a major issue why were no wheels with spokes used?
https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/image/as15_88_11901.jpg

The medal mesh getting pressed down to the inner frame is a power inefficient nightmare. It is even worse as driving with so little tire pressure to almost compress down to the rim. Each and every cross-section of the mesh chafes, what the hee hah?

[Spendulus]

Does anyone know what the urge was to pick up a rock 5 miles form base instead of just bend down and pick one up?...

Geology. Some very important rocks were literally picked up from the surface. All rocks are not the same.

In many ways, the Moon has not changed in billions of years. Sure, there's a couple of meters of dust on the top layer. But can we find some of the original rocks? What were they like? Eg the genesis rock.

Many of the rocks are breccia, sort of everything-compressed-and-fused together.

What would it mean to find little beads of orange glass?

How thick is the crust of the moon? Is there a molten core?  What causes the localized magnetic fields? Is there water? Was there water in the past?

[johnwest]

My honest opinion on this would probably be NO. If humans had landed long back with those technologies then we would have a colony by now on Moon. World wanted to see who won the space race and US grabbed that opportunity by creating this.

[Spendulus]

...
The other thing, weight is a major issue why were no wheels with spokes used? ....

All I can guess at on that would be to absolutely minimize pounds per square inch loading where the tire meets the dirt. That would be contrary to power efficiency. Yes it would seem to be like driving with half flat tires.

They were paranoid about some places having soft fluffy dust that could bury people and machines. By Apollo 15 they had a lot of knowledge about the surface, but remember, each LEM touched down in a geologically different area. Although the surface dust turned out pretty much the same in hindsight.

There may have been other reasons.

[BADecker]

...
The other thing, weight is a major issue why were no wheels with spokes used? ....

All I can guess at on that would be to absolutely minimize pounds per square inch loading where the tire meets the dirt. That would be contrary to power efficiency. Yes it would seem to be like driving with half flat tires.

They were paranoid about some places having soft fluffy dust that could bury people and machines. By Apollo 15 they had a lot of knowledge about the surface, but remember, each LEM touched down in a geologically different area. Although the surface dust turned out pretty much the same in hindsight.

There may have been other reasons.

But the real question is about landing on the moon. "Land" generally refers to ground or dirt on the earth. Where is the definition that moon-ground moon-dirt is land? If there is no such definition, then maybe we didn't land on the moon after all, even though we went there.

It's not that we can't individually make up our own definitions of words. When we do, our definition stands... even when others don't accept it. So, we could have landed on the moon. But where is the definition of "land" or "landed" that says it in a defined way?

[QuadeBarrier]

My honest opinion on this would probably be NO. If humans had landed long back with those technologies then we would have a colony by now on Moon. World wanted to see who won the space race and US grabbed that opportunity by creating this.

Why? Why would we have a colony by now? Do you think that after going to the moon, each trip afterwards would be free?

[Spendulus]

My honest opinion on this would probably be NO. If humans had landed long back with those technologies then we would have a colony by now on Moon. World wanted to see who won the space race and US grabbed that opportunity by creating this.

If Columbus had gone to the West Indies and found nothing but a vacuum and barren rocks and craters, exploration would certainly have stopped.

We didn't find gold, women, and rum on our Moon...

[GideonGono]

My honest opinion on this would probably be NO. If humans had landed long back with those technologies then we would have a colony by now on Moon. World wanted to see who won the space race and US grabbed that opportunity by creating this.

Why we need a colony on moon when there are no oxygen and planting trees might be undiscovered to the unsources land? There are few things that need to be process by which you can't prove without any evidence by landing on the moon. But for now we have an advance technology, do you believe that there are no people who land on the moon already?

[Spendulus]

My honest opinion on this would probably be NO. If humans had landed long back with those technologies then we would have a colony by now on Moon. World wanted to see who won the space race and US grabbed that opportunity by creating this.

Why we need a colony on moon when there are no oxygen and planting trees might be undiscovered to the unsources land? There are few things that need to be process by which you can't prove without any evidence by landing on the moon. But for now we have an advance technology, do you believe that there are no people who land on the moon already?

Oh, we might could use the helium3 on the moon for powering fusion reactors.
Might be very interesting to put powerful telescopes / radio telescopes on the far side. Or build a rocket propellant supply station there for solar system missions.

[notbatman]

The atmosphere is in layers separated by density, these layers form a stack of planes above the extended plain of the earth. The earth is covered by a mirrored nickel-iron composite steel dome with a positive (+) electric charge, the atmospheric planes as a result, form an area that takes the shape of a hemispheroid.

The very topmost layer is the lightest matter (so-called electrons), the next is hydrogen, then helium and so on. Energy is directed at these top layers. The Sun is a disc of plasma on the surface of the hydrogen layer and the Moon is on the surface of the helium layer. The stars and planets have their own layers too.

The plasma discs of the celestial objects are reflected by the mirrored steel dome, creating holograms we see from the surface of the earth.

As electrons and lighter gasses seek the positive charge of the dome they exert a force on the denser materials thus pushing them towards the ground (-) and forming the atmospheric layers.

Reality is in fact, radically different from the clap trap presented in the media and taught in schools.

[Cryptotourist]

Okaaay my thick skull friend, time to go to bed, you're tired.
In the morning we will reconsider if you should go back to school son.

[notbatman]

^^^ Can we learn how fractional distillation works?



I'm curious, what the school is on why different substances into separate layers?

Personally I think it's because of density, pressure and a source of electrons (-) from the extended plain that is the ground. **mic drop** God's firmament of heaven, the dome above us has a great electrical potential (+).

I can make shit stick to the roof like the exorcist in a laboratory with the Coulomb Force and a fluid via a phenomenon known as electromigration. You can take your gravity and shovel it Prof. Lizard Tits!