New Moon photos , do they really show the Apollo landing gear ?

[TechStuf]

http://www.jayweidner.com/AlchemicalKubrickIIa.html


There is certainly enough intrigue surrounding the events to go around!


TS

[utilitarian]

Well, the moon lander was so unstable with just one rocket motor ,
it would have at least crashed once during all
the moon missions.

Also I have read that there was not enough space in the moon lander,
so the astronauts could not dress well into their moon suits in the lander capsule´s
exit door decompression room.

And all the other problems that you can see, when you
type in "moon hoax" in youtube...

Smarter minds than yours and mine designed the rocket engines for the descent and ascent modules, and they worked without crashing.  Many manhours were devoted to making sure these things worked right, and they worked right.  I don't know what else to say about that.  If you look at missiles and rockets here on earth, they often also have a single engine and seem to be able to fly straight just fine.

Here is a webpage that describes how the flight control and guidance system of the lunar lander worked to keep the craft stable.

http://www.apollosaturn.com/Lmnr/gn.htm

Also, I found the attached diagram of the inside of the lander module, and there appears to be ample space for the astronauts to stand and move around a bit, so I am sure they can squeeze into a space suit there.

And really, I have looked into most claims related to the moon landing hoax.  I am talking about "no stars in photos", flag waving, Van Allen radiation, shadows, identical backgrounds, fake moon rocks, and other claims, and there seem to be good answers to these.   I wonder which claims specifically you are referring to.

I also do wonder what evidence, available today on Earth, would be sufficient to prove we went to the moon.  Is there is none, aside from magically going back in time and following the Apollo flights with some kind of camera?

[onthecuttingedge2005]

Lets chip away at this.

Deploying the Lunar Rover.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-M5r2OKPNk&NR=1

here is a picture of the inside of the fully loaded lunar module.

[hartiberlin]

Have a look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Qhcs6qiHLI


Armstrong was nearly killed when the LLRV crashed. Both LLRV crashed, yet much harder on the Moon landing on the Moon w/o runways/view to sides/down and so on... it worked six times w/o a single problem!

Amazing, is not it? Certainly. Must be noted that the used engine on LLRV is NOT a rocket, but a normal turbofan engine. That engine can be easily throtled and controlled, while rocket engines are way much harder to throtle or control... not to mention that even a 500lbs engine can make a small crater into -solid CONCRETE!
(check 2nd try there:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mHuhtS3658o
or here:

http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/2005_09_10/allHovers.mpg

Amazing! And what a 9 982 lbs engine can do to a light regolit dust? That:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/AS11-40-5921.jpg

Not see a thing? Well, that engine was never meant to run, you know.

It was just put on the scene with crane...

[onthecuttingedge2005]

there was a documentary about a decade ago where the interviewer ask Hollywood productions if they could of faked the moon landing with all the video they had, Hollywood say it would of been impossible in 1969 to build a studio with the type of graphics needed, Hollywood did not have computer graphics that sophisticated or even none at all. at best they said they could of made a good B movie but that was about it.

there is no way NASA had better equipment then Hollywood to make a movie of that magnitude and sophistication.

Jerry