New moon hoax theory...

[alexsanchez]

By way of introduction, I don't know if we went to the moon or not. Nonetheless, for those who prefer to believe we didn't, I submit that neither Buzz Armstrong, nor anyone else, circa 1969, landed on the moon. This is because no one could have returned from the moon under the scenario purported by NASA. (I don't think NASA even has a scenario.) Specifically, having no survey marker

Survey marker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Survey marker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Survey marker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

on the moon, there was no way to set up a theodolite for an IMU (inertial measurement unit) update, as was done on earth prior to launch. If you want to blast off from the moon and rendezvous with a CM orbiting at 4,000 mph, (proverbially, 5 times faster than a speeding bullet) you need to update the IMU with your exact lunar coordinates, as well as azimuth and elevation of the spacecraft. You also need to know the exact CM orbit in lunar coordinates as the guidance system needs to calculate a precision flight plan prior to liftoff. They couldn't do that. Also, they said they couldn't see the stars, (even with the optics - in my opinion - since another word for "optics" would be "periscope", a pair of prisms) so they couldn't even get an accurate bearing.

In layman's terms, if you want to go from point A to B, and have a computer get you there, you need to know the latitude and longitude (and altitude) of A and B, and B is moving really fast.

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by alexsanchez

If you want to blast off from the moon and rendezvous with a CM orbiting at 4,000 mph, (proverbially, 5 times faster than a speeding bullet) you need to update the IMU with your exact lunar coordinates, as well as azimuth and elevation of the spacecraft. You also need to know the exact CM orbit in lunar coordinates as the guidance system needs to calculate a precision flight plan prior to liftoff.

No, you don't. Your entire premise is false.

[octopus]

Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon

No, you don't. Your entire premise is false.

Thanks for your elaborate explanation.

[philthy53]

Over on ApolloHoax.net in this thread, about 1/3 of the way down the page is where alex starts to get his/her ass handed to him/her. Proving beyond a shadow of a doubt, he/she, is wrong. It's just that AG knows this particular troll, and didn't feel the need, I'm guessing, to elaborate. I knew what he meant.

Here is the link:

http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=348.690

Phil

[alexsanchez]

Originally Posted by philthy53

Over on ApolloHoax.net in this thread, about 1/3 of the way down the page is where alex starts to get his/her ass handed to him/her. Proving beyond a shadow of a doubt, he/she, is wrong. It's just that AG knows this particular troll, and didn't feel the need, I'm guessing, to elaborate. I knew what he meant.

Here is the link:

http://www.apollohoax.net/forum/index.php?topic=348.690

Phil

Your threshold for having one's ass handed to them is extremely low. They mostly called me a liar and then banned me, yet were unable to address the technical issues.

[philthy53]

Originally Posted by alexsanchez

Your threshold for having one's ass handed to them is extremely low. They mostly called me a liar and then banned me, yet were unable to address the technical issues.

Anyone that reads the thread I linked too, can see, without a doubt, that, YES, you were proved wrong, without a doubt. Read the thread.

Phil

[alexsanchez]

Originally Posted by philthy53

Anyone that reads the thread I linked too, can see, without a doubt, that, YES, you were proved wrong, without a doubt. Read the thread.

Phil

You are confusing proof with opinion. What were the values in the LM's state vector prior to the ascent, what coordinate system was used, and where did these values come from? Furthermore, I submit that radio tracking, given the time delays as well as physical constraints due to dithering the radio receiver on earth to determine the LM's position in space would be very inaccurate from 240,000 miles away.

[philthy53]

Originally Posted by alexsanchez

You are confusing proof with opinion. What were the values in the LM's state vector prior to the ascent, what coordinate system was used, and where did these values come from?

I've fed the troll enough. Read the thread.

Phil

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by alexsanchez

You are confusing proof with opinion. What were the values in the LM's state vector prior to the ascent, what coordinate system was used, and where did these values come from? Furthermore, I submit that radio tracking, given the time delays as well as physical constraints due to dithering the radio receiver on earth to determine the LM's position in space would be very inaccurate from 240,000 miles away.

Why would these things be necessary? The LM launched from the surface of the moon to orbit and then it spent energy to change that orbit to one that would meet the C/SM. It did not fly directly to the C/SM.

As I said, your entire premise is flawed logic based on false assumptions.

I'm not a space engineer, so I'm not going to bother giving you detailed technical answers. Several working engineers at AH already did that, and you ignored them and then became obnoxious. and you've wandered over here to see if you get different responses.

So, No. I'll give you short shrift. Also, I suspect you are a well-known sock-puppeteer who has been spamming JREF, AH and even comments on news articles with nonsensical poop-related arguments for about 2 years.

Prove me wrong, that the data you suggest was necessary was truly necessary and I'll retract. Prove me wrong that your premise is valid.

Yours to fail.

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by alexsanchez

Your threshold for having one's ass handed to them is extremely low. They mostly called me a liar and then banned me, yet were unable to address the technical issues.

They called you a liar because you lied about your credentials and knowledge. The technical issues were handled quite well in posts you were unable to comprehend because unlike the actual rocket scientists who wrote them you know zip-slash-nuthin' about space hardware and how it operates.

[alexsanchez]

Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon

Why would these things be necessary? The LM launched from the surface of the moon to orbit and then it spent energy to change that orbit to one that would meet the C/SM. It did not fly directly to the C/SM.

As I said, your entire premise is flawed logic based on false assumptions.

I'm not a space engineer, so I'm not going to bother giving you detailed technical answers. Several working engineers at AH already did that, and you ignored them and then became obnoxious. and you've wandered over here to see if you get different responses.

So, No. I'll give you short shrift. Also, I suspect you are a well-known sock-puppeteer who has been spamming JREF, AH and even comments on news articles with nonsensical poop-related arguments for about 2 years.

Prove me wrong, that the data you suggest was necessary was truly necessary and I'll retract. Prove me wrong that your premise is valid.

Yours to fail.

Would you like me to prove that Noah's ark wasn't logistically possible, too?

[oooooooooo]

Originally Posted by alexsanchez

By way of introduction, I don't know if we went to the moon or not. Nonetheless, for those who prefer to believe we didn't, I submit that neither Buzz Armstrong, nor anyone else, circa 1969, landed on the moon. This is because no one could have returned from the moon under the scenario purported by NASA. (I don't think NASA even has a scenario.) Specifically, having no survey markerSurvey marker - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia on the moon, there was no way to set up a theodolite for an IMU (inertial measurement unit) update, as was done on earth prior to launch. If you want to blast off from the moon and rendezvous with a CM orbiting at 4,000 mph, (proverbially, 5 times faster than a speeding bullet) you need to update the IMU with your exact lunar coordinates, as well as azimuth and elevation of the spacecraft. You also need to know the exact CM orbit in lunar coordinates as the guidance system needs to calculate a precision flight plan prior to liftoff. They couldn't do that. Also, they said they couldn't see the stars, (even with the optics - in my opinion - since another word for "optics" would be "periscope", a pair of prisms) so they couldn't even get an accurate bearing.

In layman's terms, if you want to go from point A to B, and have a computer get you there, you need to know the latitude and longitude (and altitude) of A and B, and B is moving really fast.

interesting, could you expand on this idea.
maybe they just guessed.

Also I am led to believe that the actor nauts could see stars through the optics, but just cannot recall seeing them.
The " I don't recall" is the classic defence of the guilty ( or mind controlled stooge ).

[moving finger]

I smell sweaty feet.

The CM pilot knew where he was and what orbit he was on, not only because the orbit was part of the flight plan, but by the land marks over which he was flying.

Check the link in my signature for links to Google Moon files that show the exact orbits as shown by photographs.

The LM crews knew where they were, because they were heading for a specific point on the moon, and the orbital path they took was designed to get them there. You can look in my sig link for details of how stills from the landing videos match exactly with LRO views not available at the time. The video stills for Apollo 11 were published a few weeks after the landing in a popular magazine, also available on my site.

Re-uniting the LM with the CM was a matter of timing the take off so that they rendez-vous at the on the same orbital path they landed on, adjusting speed as required. Anyone who has joined a moving walkway has done this countless times.

Again, check my link in my sig. There is a movie made from sequenced stills of Apollo 11's rendez-vous. That meeting shows a view of Earth that only applied at the specific date and time of the rendez-vous.

In other words, I can prove and have proven my arguments. Let's have yours.

o..etc's argument about stars is tired, boring, easily disproved, and off-topic.

[oooooooooo]

Originally Posted by moving finger

I smell sweaty feet.

The CM pilot knew where he was and what orbit he was on, not only because the orbit was part of the flight plan, but by the land marks over which he was flying.

Check the link in my signature for links to Google Moon files that show the exact orbits as shown by photographs.

The LM crews knew where they were, because they were heading for a specific point on the moon, and the orbital path they took was designed to get them there. You can look in my sig link for details of how stills from the landing videos match exactly with LRO views not available at the time. The video stills for Apollo 11 were published a few weeks after the landing in a popular magazine, also available on my site.

Re-uniting the LM with the CM was a matter of timing the take off so that they rendez-vous at the on the same orbital path they landed on, adjusting speed as required. Anyone who has joined a moving walkway has done this countless times.

Again, check my link in my sig. There is a movie made from sequenced stills of Apollo 11's rendez-vous. That meeting shows a view of Earth that only applied at the specific date and time of the rendez-vous.

In other words, I can prove and have proven my arguments. Let's have yours.

o..etc's argument about stars is tired, boring, easily disproved, and off-topic.

you know, if I were a casual reader I would have been impressed simply by the certainty of your response,

You claim they knew their location because they were heading for a "specific point on the moon",
but A11 overshot this "specific point" according to the official version of history.

The nauts did not know thier exact location.
The control centre did not know their exact location.
The lick observatory only knew the exact location after "mission complete".

Kind of ruins your "exact location" hypothesis.

Please post how the actornauts worked out their "exact location", I'm sure it's not a secret, is it ?


the aroma i'm getting reminds me of the time I spent farming.

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by alexsanchez

Would you like me to prove that Noah's ark wasn't logistically possible, too?

If you would like, but please do it in another thread. If you look around the forum you will notice there is a specific subforum for religious topics.

Yes, you started the thread, but if you drag it that far off-topic I'll report you. Intelligent posts will get intelligent responses from me. Idiotic posts (such as using the name "buzz armstrong" in your OP) will receive the responses they earn.

As was explained to you in January on AH by actual rocket engineers, orbital rendezvous is not "shooting a bullet at a bullet" and does not require the meticulous level of positional information you seem to think it needs. The first step is to get the vehicle from the ground to orbit, any orbit. The level of positional and trajectory information available was sufficient to get the Lunar Module into an orbit from which it could easily meet up with the C/SM's orbit using LM fuel only.

There was a discussion on another forum about how far off an LM could land from original intended position and still hook up with the C/SM afterwards. The answer was something like 20 or 25 degrees north or south would use all the LM's fuel budget adjusting orbit and then the C/SM would have to spend some fuel to get the rest of the way there. In other words, you can pretty much put the LM into any orbit and still rendezvous.

So, as I said in my first reply to your OP, your entire premise is flawed because of false assumptions.

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by oooooooooo

you know, if I were a casual reader I would have been impressed simply by the certainty of your response,

You claim they knew their location because they were heading for a "specific point on the moon",
but A11 overshot this "specific point" according to the official version of history.

The nauts did not know thier exact location.
The control centre did not know their exact location.
The lick observatory only knew the exact location after "mission complete".

Kind of ruins your "exact location" hypothesis.

Please post how the actornauts worked out their "exact location", I'm sure it's not a secret, is it ?

Apollo 11 landed about 4 miles downrange of the original intended landing position to avoid a boulder field. They knew where they were within a bounded ellipse on the map, well within the available fuel budget for orbital rendezvous, and more importantly they knew after only a few orbits where the C/SM was. That's the important detail, as it drives the timing of the LM Ascent stage launch to minimize the time/fuel spent matching orbits.

the aroma i'm getting reminds me of the time I spent farming.

Indeed, but perhaps you could put yourself on ignore to minimize exposure to the source?

[oooooooooo]

Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon

Apollo 11 landed about 4 miles downrange of the original intended landing position to avoid a boulder field. They knew where they were within a bounded ellipse on the map, well within the available fuel budget for orbital rendezvous, and more importantly they knew after only a few orbits where the C/SM was. That's the important detail, as it drives the timing of the LM Ascent stage launch to minimize the time/fuel spent matching orbits.



Indeed, but perhaps you could put yourself on ignore to minimize exposure to the source?

put myself on ignore,
But then I would miss out on my informative yet entertaining posts.

is the * buzz Armstrong peering out the LM window (shielding his eyes of course) looking for the CM * conversation in the official transcripts ?


Did they not think to tell the poor f*ckers at the lick observatory to stop searching their car park for the lost pioneers ?

[apollo_gnomon]

Originally Posted by oooooooooo

Did they not think to tell the poor f*ckers at the lick observatory to stop searching their car park for the lost pioneers ?

Check your pant leg. It seems to have ridden up a bit.

[mido]

I can only find info online stating the command module orbited the moon at over 5000 mph. If that's so i cant see how the landing module Eagle could take off and dock. How does it get up to 5000 mph It wouldn't have enough fuel surely to accelerate to such high speed?

[apollo_gnomon]

This link might be a bit deeper than you want to go, but the numbers are well worked out.

http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/LM-ascent.htm