Military Review

Bloody Moon John F. Kennedy

466

John Fitzgerald Kennedy, when he became 35th President of the United States, announced before Congress on May 25, 1961, the ambition of the Americans landing on the moon.


Kennedy was ruined by the moon


It should be noted that in the space race between the USSR and the United States, which unfolded since 1955, the Americans were losing on all priority targets. The Soviet Union was the first to not only launch a spacecraft into space (October 4, 1957), but also the first to launch a spacecraft with a man on board (April 12, 1961).

It was not just a rivalry between two superpowers that took place, it was a competition between two systems: socialism and capitalism. Victory in space became a litmus of technical progress and a triumph of ideology.

America then needed revenge, a success unattainable for the USSR, a victory proving the complete superiority of capitalism and the United States in all spheres of development. For this, the conquest of the moon was chosen as the goal for which the game was worth any candle. In the first five years alone, it was planned to spend $ 9 billion on this idea. By 1973, the total cost of the Apollo program was 25,4 billion (or $ 152 billion in current prices).

Bloody Moon John F. Kennedy

In its spectacularity, the event was supposed to surpass everything previously known, turning all the previous successes of the Soviet Union into secondary ones, instantly returning the United States not only to the lost space positions, but also making the United States a triumphant winner in the rivalry between the two systems.

Obviously, the priority in this program was given to a more political factor than a scientific one, and it was also supposed to become a grandiose world show. All this, in the first place, was required for the wounded prestige of the United States.

In the planned landing of people on the moon, the Americans certainly had to get ahead of the Soviet Union, whose success in space exploration continued to rapidly develop.

"We choose to go to the Moon" (we decided to fly to the moon),

Is a speech given by John F. Kennedy to students at Rice University in Houston, one of Kennedy's first Apollo speeches and plans for the first man to land on the moon.

What happened, however, was that the Soviet Union, which had suffered after the hardest war, was ahead of the rich and well-fed United States in rocketry.

In many ways, this was the success of the "Soviet" German rocketry, captured from the "Fau" programs, under the leadership of Helmut Grettrup, Soviet science and our designers such as Sergei Korolev.

Werner von Braun, SS Sturmbannfuehrer, more director than designer, with his team of "captured" Germans in the USA did not achieve what the USSR received. Although it is from him that the Americans will make the image of a space genius who has created an unrivaled rocket to this day. And suddenly died shortly after the end of the announced flights under the Apollo program.


Problems with lunar ambitions became apparent to the Americans shortly after the announcement of these intentions in the US Congress.

The desired was at odds with the reality, the United States continued to yield to the USSR in space achievements. And first of all in manned astronautics, which is critical for the goal of landing people on the moon.

Therefore, on November 16, 1963, in the narrowest circle, a decisive meeting on the problems of the Apollo program was held with the participation of President John F. Kennedy.

Less than a week after this meeting, Kennedy was assassinated.



The most famous are two popular versions of the reasons for this murder.

So on June 4, 1963, Kennedy signed Executive Order 11110, according to which the Federal Government, for the first time since 11110, received the right to print currency without going to the US Federal Reserve. The issue would take place by decision of the President and without the approval of Congress, as required by the US Constitution.

Secondly, Kennedy demanded registration from Jewish organizations as

"Foreign agents"

on the territory of the United States, which would severely limit their ability to influence politics.

But there is also something that remains in the shadows.

Kennedy was ready to cooperate with the USSR in joint space exploration.

So, John F. Kennedy suggested that the Soviet Union jointly carry out work on landing a man on the moon. And this is after the grandiose single-handed ambitions of the United States, which it also announced earlier!

This was told by American historian John Logsdon, a former member of the NASA Advisory Board, founder of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University.

According to Logsdon, Kennedy repeated his proposal to Khrushchev again in 1963, when Apollo was threatened with cancellation and relations between the USSR and the United States warmed after the Cuban missile crisis.

Confident of success, Khrushchev again refused, as this would have smoothed out the absolute victory of socialism over capitalism. Nikita Sergeevich had no particular doubts that the Soviet Union would be ahead of the United States on the moon.


The United States is hopelessly behind the Soviet Union in manned space exploration. For this reason alone, the American president proposed cooperation that would allow at least the United States to save face at the international level and gain access to Soviet experience and technologies in manned space exploration.

Kennedy's proposal was unprecedented. If, on the contrary, the USSR lagged behind the USA in space, they would not have offered us anything like that.

Khrushchev's refusal left the Americans no choice. The ultimate loss in Space Race would have put the US in an extremely difficult position. It was a matter of "life and death" for capitalism and for the United States itself, which became the world leader and master of the capitalist system.

How often quoted a phrase that is essentially correct:

"There is no such crime that capital will not go for a profit of 300%."

It could be continued like this:

to "any crime" and for the sake of further flourishing parasitism.

Moreover, it is acceptable for capitalist morality in the United States, be it the murder of its own president or a monstrous and blatant falsification.

Could John F. Kennedy agree to the lunar scam, deception of the entire world community, incrimination of which would put the United States on the brink of national disgrace and disaster?

Hardly. Therefore, he offered cooperation.

With this step, Kennedy left no choice to world capitalism, having signed his own death warrant. Including on such an important issue as the absolute victory of the United States in space, as the absolute victory of capitalism over socialism.

Brezhnev was bought by the moon


In October 1964, Nikita Khrushchev also lost his position. His place was taken by Leonid Brezhnev. All further events took place during his reign.

In the United States, preparations for the lunar mission were in full swing, its spectacular part was largely inspired by the 1968 film by Stanley Kubrick (written by Arthur Clarke) "A Space Odyssey of 2001".

Just as it seemed to Arthur Clarke that by the XNUMXst century mankind would have mastered deep space in manned flights, so much in the American program was done "for growth." It was with the confession of Kubrick (after which he died suddenly) in the falsification of the entire US lunar program that the scandal began. Apart from narrow specialists, now the whole world is thinking. And it split into those who believed in the United States and those who began to doubt.

In fact, as a safety net, you could have filmed something in the Hollywood pavilion.

But how it turned out, everything was much more complicated.

NASA came up with their own "space odyssey" from scratch (about many things only by ideas, due to the lack of real experience), focusing on theories, assumptions, preliminary calculations and publicly available scientific information.

However, it is difficult to come up with what you know firsthand. If TASS stated that our cosmonauts feel great after returning from orbit, our American "partners" took this into account.

To illustrate, two photos, immediately giving rise to doubts about the reality of American manned flights. These are fixed facts that you cannot deny.


Having no idea about how they really felt after a long stay in zero gravity, the Americans imagined that returning from orbit should look like Hollywood.

This fact alone is only part of the many blunders and inconsistencies. The assumption immediately suggests itself about the entire American show mission to "conquer" the moon.

After an oxygen environment in a reduced pressure, in which the subjects felt bad even on Earth, leaving the pressure chamber, what can we say about the added weightlessness and tightness of the capsule, while still in spacesuits filled with feces, without toilets for several days.

All the broadcasts "from space" from American astronauts were more reminiscent of old radio shows based on far-fetched science fiction stories than real reports.

It turns out that the Americans engaged in falsification even before the "flights" to the moon, shortly after the assassination of Kennedy. This is all of their "manned" astronautics of that period, including the Skylab tank-dummy.

When the Chief Designer Academician Vasily Pavlovich Mishin, who replaced Sergei Pavlovich Korolev, learned about the launch of Apollo 8 to the Moon, he said,

"It can't be, they are adventurers doing a comedy in space."

It turns out that maybe ...

Later, already in 1970, at MGGS-70 (International Geological and Geophysical Symposium of 1970), the Americans showed a film about their flights to the Moon. At the end of this film there was a five-minute interview with the director of the American lunar program, recorded specifically for MGGS-70, in which he summed up that in the USSR they could not fly along the Kondratyuk route, but in the USA they did.

"Kondratyuk's track" is another theoretical borrowing of an old publication, where a 1st year student, Alexander Stepanovich Shagrey, published his calculation of a flight to the moon under the pseudonym "Yuri Vasilyevich Kondratyuk". At that time, no one knew about the existence of radiation belts (or the Van Allen belt) near the Earth, and, in general, the study of radioactivity was just beginning.

The “Kondratyuk track” is a trajectory with minimal energy consumption, but it passes through the radiation belts in places where the maximum concentration of protons, electrons and other radioactive particles.



The American engineer from NASA John Houbolt took advantage of the ideas of the Kondratyuk Trail. Moreover, it turned out that when traveling along the trajectory officially declared by NASA only one way, the Americans should have received lethal doses of radiation.

This is not counting the fact that their flights began in the years of maximum activity of the Sun, and the starts were often superimposed on the arising magnetic storms.


The scandal that began then at the symposium on the same evening was closed by an order from the Central Committee of the CPSU to the Presidium of the USSR Academy of Sciences, where it was strongly recommended to forget about the Kondratyuk route with radiation belts and

"Don't annoy American friends."

Why?

Maybe because the 35th President of the United States John F. Kennedy suddenly offered the Soviet Union cooperation in manned exploration of the Moon, and their 37th President Richard Nixon, again, suddenly flew in 1972 personally to Moscow, and the United States went to grandiose concessions, and also presented expensive personal gifts to Brezhnev?

All of this strangely coincided with America's great achievements in landing on the moon.

The apotheosis of American friendship with the "defeated" USSR in space was the joint show "Soyuz-Apollo", where, following the logic, only one "Soyuz" actually flew.

You have to understand that, as before, everyone saw only an enchanting American launch with Apollo and the same splashdown with sniper accuracy next to their ships.

By the way, even more risky in terms of overloads, the refusal of the Americans from the "two-dive" scheme of entering the Earth's atmosphere could not give the declared accuracy of the splashdown of the American Apollo. Drop the Apollo capsule from a high-altitude freighter? Yes, you can fit into that "patch". Then it can be explained why the daughter's descent vehicle was not burned at high velocities of entry into the atmosphere.


If dear Leonid Ilyich made a deal with the Americans, this explains a lot in that “detente”. And with what the United States paid off for recognition and silence.

This can also explain how suddenly, as if on assignment or "for the sake of self-interest," in our country there were many supporters of the project of conquering the moon by the United States. Among them is cosmonaut Yevgeny Leonov, a direct participant in the Soyuz-Apollo program.

Our President Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, when asked about the lunar falsification, answered with humor, as a private person:

“I know this version.

But it seems to me that it is impossible to falsify such an event.

This is the same thing that some claim that on September 11, the Americans themselves blew up these twin towers. They themselves directed the actions of the terrorists.

Complete nonsense! Brad, this is impossible! ... Complete nonsense!

The same applies to the landing on the moon: it is impossible to falsify an event of this magnitude. "

(Forum "Seliger", August 1, 2011).

Towards the Twin Towers. Correlate the mass of the plane and the mass of the steel and concrete building ...



For both towers to fold like houses of cards inside, even an aircraft carrier that crashed from the sky would not have achieved such an effect. Plus, a terrorist passport was found right on the ruins. Unburned? Where can we go without it?

Very muddy thing.

Why then did the third skyscraper fall in the same way at a distance, into which no planes crashed?
And where did all the wreckage from the plane that "rammed" the part of the Pentagon that was empty due to repairs go?

Who, besides the United States, also created and sponsored world terrorism, and then pretended that he was fighting it too? Aren't the Americans themselves?

Whoever laughed at the crystal "honesty" of these same Americans. Take at least the same test tube of "white powder" that Colin Powell was shaking at the UN to find a suitable excuse for the US invasion of Iraq?


As in the case of the flights to the moon, with the twin towers, we were presented with implausible excuses and a combination of facts. For example, that the third skyscraper allegedly fell because gas exploded under it, by coincidence, at the same moment. This, what kind of field exploded there, what could work in full accordance with the technology of industrial detonation?

Is the Moon an American Earth Satellite?


Now the States have begun to claim their special rights to a natural satellite of the Earth called the Moon.

Moreover, they are not even in a hurry to land on it again. And, moreover, their super-reliable rovers seem to have been navigating the vastness of Mars for many years. At the same time, up to the present time on the Moon, the States have not been able to run in any real and even inferior lunar rover.

There is also such a directive as the "US National Space Policy". She is very suitable just for the protection of secrets for all visits by the Americans to the moon. After all, these trips to the moon are indicated by no less than

"Critical Information for American National Interests."

That is, it is the strictest secret.

Only Russia (as the assignee of the USSR) now has the full right to inspect the lunar surface with any detail that is possible.

This is possible now. And it was possible even under Brezhnev - to make an inspection flyby of the moon. Even if in automatic mode, but this does not happen?

Hans Christian Anderson wrote the fairy tale "The New Dress of the King". Just as in that fairy tale, events unfold today: everyone clearly sees that the king is naked. But to say something about it honestly and openly (read: officially) is in no way possible.

In the United States, everything is sewn with "white thread". All of their crafty explanations for flying to the moon. Exactly the same as in stories with the industrial detonation of those fatal twin towers.

No one is going to quarrel with America now. Including our new "elite".

Moreover, for the United States it is still a matter of life and death. Up to the threat of the outbreak of war. If they are caught in a lie, then this is an indelible national shame.

To everyone who piously believes in Hollywood speculation, let me remind you:

“This is one small step for man, but a giant leap for all mankind.”

But the fact is that the United States is not all of humanity. And that, yes, the richest country, but still ahead of the Soviet Union in manned cosmonautics.

Brezhnev's deal with the United States provided temporary benefits. But it gave rise to a fetish of the West, the loss of ideology, as a result of the betrayal of socialism by party renegades and the death of the Soviet Union.

A whole army of adherents of the "lunar witnesses" and dollar trolls, together with demagogues from NASA, get out in explanations and excuses. They, I must say, even go so far as to throw in fakes like that "Gagarin did not fly at all." So it goes to the point that "The Earth is flat" will soon agree ... Their dollar silver coins, of course, will be credited to them.

The inconsistencies about the moon


Until now, NASA has not been able to safely return crews from deep space. This circumstance alone is enough to ruin the reality of the Apollo flights to the moon.

And the falsification of the Apollo program itself is revealed from the very sources of NASA in the following directions:

1. An attempt to develop a heavy lunar launch vehicle over a period of five years resulted in the acknowledgment of the existence of serious vibration problems in the first stage of the rocket, similar to those experienced on Saturn 5. Subsequently, the Ares series missiles had to be abandoned.

2. The F-1 engines of the first stage of "Saturn-5" are not even discussed in the current analytical documents of NASA.

3. An upgraded version of the Saturn 2 second stage J-5 engine has been proposed for the new heavy rocket, but NASA now claims that it really boils down to a new development and work has been put on hold.

4. NASA is still unable to develop a heavy rocket with a payload of 70 tons, let alone repeat the capabilities of Saturn-5.

5. NASA qualifies the takeoff from the lunar surface as an ascent from a "deep gravity well", and plans to land on the moon were delayed so much that they were practically abandoned. This is not surprising, since the Apollo lunar module was clearly unable to take off from the landing platform due to the lack of gas venting channels.

6. The Apollo command module had the property of bistability during landing, that is, there was an equiprobable danger of its overturn and combustion when entering the Earth's atmosphere.

7. NASA still does not have a reliable heat shield for the command module to safely return crews from deep space.

8. The profile of "one-hole" (direct) entry into the Earth's atmosphere, declared in the reports on "Apollo", is practically inapplicable. If implemented when landing at the second space velocity, it can be catastrophic for the lander.

9. If the descent vehicle somehow transferred the entry into the atmosphere, then during the descent the astronauts would be in critical condition due to the serious danger of severe gravitational overloads after a long period of weightlessness and, most likely, after splashdown would be in a serious condition and would not look so cheerful.

10. The lack of key knowledge regarding human exposure to solar and space radiation in outer space makes real protection from radiation very problematic.

Finally, the last and main question:

"Where is the money, Zin?"

How and why did the most important evidence disappear: all the lunar soil disappeared? The originals of all photographic and film materials were also destroyed?

Conclusion


In conclusion, it must be said that if we take a strictly scientific basis, then it will become evident that we know about the manned Apollo flights to the Moon exclusively from NASA. There is not a single independent confirmation of these missions to date.
There weren't even any attempts at inspections, although there are no fundamental technical obstacles to this.

Therefore, the belief in the Apollo flights is entirely based today solely on the belief in the alleged honesty of NASA. But this approach is contrary to scientific principles and cannot be considered objective.

As Alexei Vadimovich Vandam (major general of the Russian army, military intelligence officer and writer) once said:

"Worse than a war with the Anglo-Saxon can only be friendship with him."

It is difficult to say what would have happened if this story had gone differently, had Khrushchev agreed to cooperate in space with Kennedy, would the USSR have won or lost then?

But definitely, the collapse of the Soviet Union largely determined the recognition by the Soviet leadership of the American landing on the moon.

In other words, the American mission "Blood Moon" of criminal capitalism destroyed the country of the USSR. But everything could be different.

The moon would just remain the moon. And I would call to the great deeds of our scientists and our people. Would be our well-deserved victory. And all this was lost so ineptly. No, you have to be honest.

All this was simply sold. Our elites. Buying a lie about the American moon
Author:
Photos used:
http://www.myshared.ru/slide/711782/ https://yandex.ru/images
466 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. A.TOR
    A.TOR 20 February 2021 12: 06
    +16
    The meaning of the word "rubbish" is revealed in a new way ...
    1. Destiny
      Destiny 20 February 2021 12: 21
      -4
      Indeed, what does the Moon have to do with it ... I would rather believe the version about the collusion of the oligarchs from the military-industrial complex or the oil barons of Texas, led by Harold Hunt, than this .. Some kind of muddle.
      1. Nasrat
        Nasrat 20 February 2021 12: 24
        +12
        the American mission "Blood Moon" of criminal capitalism destroyed the country of the USSR. But everything could be different.
        .

        Owl on the globe, so they haven't pulled it yet !!! wassat Who is not to blame for the destruction of the USSR !!! The main thing is that we would then be clean and childishly naive !!! And you can continue to look for someone to blame !!!
        1. A1845
          A1845 20 February 2021 14: 49
          -4
          The article is offensive in relation to the Soviet lunar program. Leonov could become the first person on the moon.
          1. Plastmaster
            Plastmaster 26 February 2021 18: 50
            0
            Noooooo, for some reason he agreed. Why?
        2. Simargl
          Simargl 20 February 2021 18: 59
          +3
          Quote: Nasr
          Owl on the globe, so they haven't pulled it yet !!!
          Yes, along the way, not on the globe - pulled on the moon.
        3. bayard
          bayard 20 February 2021 19: 04
          +27
          Quote: Nasr
          The main thing is that we would then be clean and childishly naive !!!

          What kind of purity we are talking about, if both the leadership of the USSR and our specialized specialists knew about the scam.
          Another thing is that then - in 1972, a global conspiracy of our and their elites took place.
          And there were several reasons for this conspiracy:
          - the continuing war in Vietnam, in which the Americans were losing and already loudly started talking about the use of nuclear weapons to resolve the "Vietnam issue".
          - the continuing Arab-Israeli war in the BV, where Egypt and Syria were consistently losing, so much that the Soviet Union had to deploy almost an entire army in Egypt. And this conflict could also develop into a global nuclear one, and took away from the USSR enormous forces and resources ... And did not promise any special benefits in the event of a victory of the Arab side (we did not need internal Jewish terrorism and sabotage at all), because everything that we were interested from the Arab countries, we already had ...
          ... some more less global, but very sensitive reasons ...
          And when the USSR Navy fished out the dummy of the Apolon-13 descent vehicle and ... secretly, but with the presence of some journalists (from a Hungarian large-circulation workers' newspaper), with a photo report of the transfer process itself, they handed it over to the American side in our Murmansk (!!!) ... the Americans had to make a deal with the USSR paying very ... very substantial compensation.
          Well, and gifts to "dear Leonid Ilyich".

          Thus, two severe military conflicts were ruled out - the United States left Vietnam, we left Egypt, we were not prevented from building a gas pipeline from Siberia to Western Europe, we were built the flagship of our heavy automotive industry - KAMAZ, providing all the technologies, the car project itself (in the United States, this car it never went into production) and allocated an extremely preferential loan, and ... the USA began to supply the USSR with feed grain (for our cattle) at a price lower than its prime cost (!).
          And the USSR, in turn, supported the American lunar bluff, did not support the Arab countries in their oil blockade of the United States, and moreover, it supported the United States with its oil supplies and pledged to continue selling oil only for dollars.

          ... So they bought our elite ...
          And it all ended with the death of our Fatherland, the dismemberment of a single state into factions, the collapse of the socialism system, the CMEA economic system, the betrayal of our allies in the world ... national shame and defeat, the impoverishment of the population, the degradation of the economy, the education system, medicine and other social gains of our people ...

          But the traitors feel just great - having surrendered the Great Country and the Great Idea, they received into their personal property and under personal control all the wealth of the world's largest country ... and over its long-suffering people.

          And it was the "Lunar Agreement" that became the fuse and the reason for this fatal deal for our People.
          1. Doctor
            Doctor 21 February 2021 10: 03
            -3
            What purity are we talking about if both the leadership of the USSR and our specialized specialists knew about the scam?

            Why are there specialized ones! Even Vysotsky knew!laughing

          2. Flooding
            Flooding 21 February 2021 19: 01
            0
            Quote: bayard
            And when the USSR Navy fished out the dummy of the Apolon-13 descent vehicle and ... secretly, but with the presence of some journalists (from a Hungarian large-circulation workers' newspaper), with a photo report of the transfer process itself, they handed it over to the American side in our Murmansk (!!!) ... the Americans had to make a deal with the USSR paying very ... very substantial compensation.

            this is something new.
            How did the Hungarians end up there?
            1. bayard
              bayard 21 February 2021 19: 48
              +10
              This is a great secret and the peculiarities of the KGB's work in such a delicate operation.
              Andropov was wise then ...
              However, the photographs of those journalists, as well as the issue of the Hungarian large circulation, have survived.
              And published.
              When putting pressure on the "partner", such techniques are often used - they publish compromising evidence in a third-rate rag and offer to come to an agreement. If you agree, everything is fine (who reads this rag?), But if not ... they publish everywhere and "long live the scandal."
              Usually the partners agree.
              Then they definitely agreed.
              And they settled a lot of questions.
              1. victor50
                victor50 22 February 2021 13: 39
                -1
                Quote: bayard
                When putting pressure on the "partner", such techniques are often used

                It's amazing that with such knowledge you still don't rule the world ?! request laughing
                1. bayard
                  bayard 22 February 2021 15: 02
                  +7
                  I am a humble person, why do I need this world?
                  Type in the search engine "Lunar scam", alas, I forgot the author. This is a very voluminous material with a mass of photographic materials, calculations, calculations and documents. If you are an honest person, it will be interesting for you and you will figure it out.
                  If you are not interested in this, then this is only evidence of bias, bias, or just a little mind.
                  But I hope that your mind is sound and you are simply mistaken.
                  1. victor50
                    victor50 22 February 2021 17: 31
                    -6
                    Quote: bayard
                    Type in the search engine "Lunar scam", alas I forgot the author

                    And you can also read Nasonov and Fomenko about history. Or better to look at RenTV! laughing I really like the phrase someone said in the late 80s: As soon as the borders were opened, UFOs poured into us! laughing
                    Quote: bayard
                    If you are an honest person, it will be interesting for you and you will figure it out.

                    I'm honest but not stupid! And I would recommend you to doubt your knowledge a little, to criticize and try yourself, or something.
                    1. bayard
                      bayard 22 February 2021 17: 48
                      +5
                      Quote: victor50
                      And you can also read Nasonov and Fomenko about history

                      They wrote not about that.
                      Quote: victor50
                      Or better to look at RenTV!

                      Everyone has their own quirks.
                      Quote: victor50
                      I really like the phrase someone said in the late 80s:

                      In those years, many people spoke, and even now they have not forgotten how.
                      Quote: victor50
                      I'm honest but not stupid!

                      smile How many fools have repeated this phrase. lol
                      Quote: victor50
                      And I would recommend you to doubt your knowledge a little,

                      My knowledge is of a practical nature, after all, I have provided spacecraft landings for several years, and I am familiar with many designers of the spacecraft. lol
                      Quote: victor50
                      criticize try yourself, or something.

                      Start with yourself. First of all, because of their illiteracy.
                      And ending with education.
    2. Cosm22
      Cosm22 20 February 2021 12: 26
      +14
      A classic demonstration of the meaning of the expression "bullshit".
      Of course, the current stagnation in the Russian space program must somehow be justified. Including such clumsy attempts to turn the arrows back on the sore-set "lunar conspiracy theory".
      But this pearl does not even pull on a fig leaf. You can't hide behind them.
      The resource level is clearly falling. Ridiculous and fables are not his profile.
      1. lucul
        lucul 20 February 2021 12: 29
        0
        A classic demonstration of the meaning of the expression "bullshit".

        Oppas have already forgotten how to refute - they now have absolutely everything that contradicts their point of view)))
        1. Cosm22
          Cosm22 20 February 2021 12: 53
          +14
          You see, publishing this kind of nonsense is designed to do just that.
          The fact that disputes, discussions, attacks of the parties, etc. will begin.
          And the ultimate goal of such a stuffing will be achieved - people will again argue to the point of hoarseness about whether the Americans were on the moon, and not remember the problems of Roscosmos.
          I can multiply by zero by playing any of the so-called "arguments" of the article. The points.
          But I will not do it. Even if they pay for it. I don't participate in such dirty games.
          I will cease to respect myself if I go down to commenting on such nonsense in detail.
          Do you like it? Well, here's the cards in your hands.
          And I understood the meaning of the word "provocation" in early childhood.
          1. Nasrat
            Nasrat 20 February 2021 13: 01
            +7
            Quote: Cosm22
            You see, publishing this kind of nonsense is designed to do just that.
            that disputes, discussions, attacks of the parties, etc. will begin.

            Standing applause !!! The entire VO resource is aimed at this !!! No .., there is simply no normal article where the author would lift his butt off the computer and hit the road on a business trip to a factory, to a factory, to a farm, to a shipyard, etc. - showed how the country really lives !! Constant dregs and yellow-fresh "criticism" without leaving the couch ... it is not surprising that the comrades adequately and competently comment on a technical article, they simply fled, there were only bawlers for political education ...
            1. lucul
              lucul 20 February 2021 13: 06
              -4
              Standing applause !!! The entire VO resource is aimed at this !!!

              How is the weather in Haifa? Didn't it snow like in Texas? )))
              1. Nasrat
                Nasrat 20 February 2021 13: 11
                0
                Quote: lucul
                Standing applause !!! The entire VO resource is aimed at this !!!

                How is the weather in Haifa? Didn't it snow like in Texas? )))

                It's funny that I didn't minus ... wassat see someone from Texas offended !!!
              2. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 21 February 2021 11: 47
                +3
                Quote: lucul
                How is the weather in Haifa?

                Thank you, it's cold, but in moderation.
                +14
            2. A1845
              A1845 20 February 2021 14: 51
              +8
              There are also exceptions - for example, articles by Sergey Linnik. But as a general rule, yes ... more hype
          2. lucul
            lucul 20 February 2021 13: 05
            -6
            And the ultimate goal of such a stuffing will be achieved - people will again argue to the point of hoarseness about whether the Americans were on the moon, and not remember the problems of Roscosmos.

            Yeah, yeah - it looks like - so I jumped off the roof of a 19-storey building, down onto the asphalt, and not a scratch. I have a video over there - my friend was filming. When asked to repeat it graphically, he replies - here's another, I jumped, I proved to myself, it hurts I need to jump again for you.
            Doubt? Prove it. And in response - only left-wing excuses.
          3. aybolyt678
            aybolyt678 20 February 2021 17: 01
            0
            Quote: Cosm22
            I can multiply by zero by playing any of the so-called "arguments" of the article. The points.

            I am of V.Surdin's opinion, what do you think is correct ??
            1. Cosm22
              Cosm22 20 February 2021 19: 13
              +10
              Yes, any point of view has a right to exist. Including the wrong one. Anything other than outright nonsense. Where in one "cocktail" a bunch of fakes are pulled.
              Surdin, at least, relies on common facts.
              But you can't get through retrogrades.
              They bought, it turns out, the mattress covers for me and the Moon, period! Diluted like suckers.
              Who are you?
              The Central Committee of the CPSU of the USSR?
              USSR Council of Ministers?
              Politburo?
              USSR Academy of Sciences?
              A squad of astronauts?
              Dozens and hundreds of Soviet scientists, laboratories, research institutes, observatories, military men, finally?
              Is everyone flattered by American gum? For nasty bucks?
              And that, there was not a single sane person in the USSR?
              1. bayard
                bayard 21 February 2021 13: 43
                +12
                Quote: Cosm22
                They bought, it turns out, the mattress covers for me and the Moon, period! Diluted like suckers.
                Who are you?
                The Central Committee of the CPSU of the USSR?
                USSR Council of Ministers?
                Politburo?
                USSR Academy of Sciences?
                A squad of astronauts?
                Dozens and hundreds of Soviet scientists, laboratories, research institutes, observatories, military men, finally?

                Not .
                The Americans bought the Politburo and dear Leonid Ilyich.
                This was enough for orders, directives, and "recommendations" to pass along the entire vertical.
                The party said - "it is necessary", the Komsomol answered - "there is."
                Too many people knew and understood the meaning of what happened. But everyone involved in astronautics was advised ... to forget, be silent, and do something more useful.
                Such advice was always perceived with great understanding, and there was enough work even without the Moon - BZHRK had to be created with "Molodets", "Voevoda" about ten heads with breakthrough means, "Stilette" as a development of the UR-100, "Buran" with "Energia" ...
                The commander of the lunar cosmonaut corps Yu.A. Gagarin - died.
                Leonov? smile
                Separate sad conversation.
                And about the American "Lunar Program" in general, somehow suspiciously quickly forgotten ... It even became ... indecent to speak on this topic ... Young specialists who believed and were sincerely interested in this (American) program ... were perceived with irony and advised do something more serious.
                Following those young believers, others grew up ... and then you ...
                Do something useful ... start the "Science" module, or finish the "Eagle \ Federation" to mind ...
                And there is no need to defend the "Americans on the Moon". smile
                They cannot defend themselves either. lol
                Quote: Cosm22
                Tens and hundreds of scientists of the USSR, laboratories, research institutes, observatories, military,

                They knew. yes
                They were just disciplined and responsible people with a nondisclosure agreement.
                Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they kept this subscription ...
                1. ship
                  ship 21 February 2021 22: 36
                  +2
                  The article and your comments are so interesting and true that I assumed - "their author is the same." Where the "moon money" went is also clear. Thank you very much.
                  1. bayard
                    bayard 21 February 2021 23: 07
                    +8
                    You flattered me, Yuri, but I am not the author of this article.
                    However, I really learned about the "Lunar Scam" back in 1985, during my cadet years, and much later met with many people involved in the rocket and space industry who knew about the American scam. Among them were the designer of the Yuzhnoye design bureau, who participated in the Soviet lunar program, developed the lunar landing module ... and later created the magnificent "Scalpel \ Done" for the BZHRK.

                    But since my school years I was one of the "believers" in the "Apollo" program, my whole room was pasted over with photographs of "Saturn-5" in all forms and a mass of photographs of "astronauts on the moon". And Neil Armstrong with Yuri Gagarin in the photos next ...
                    But I was ... dissuaded. And they told this whole story, about which so much literature was later written. And about the fact that everything was filmed by Kubrick ... They knew - EVERYTHING.
                    1. ship
                      ship 22 February 2021 01: 23
                      +5
                      I was not flattering, I just noted the informational similarity. I have never been a "believer" in the Apollo program, rather the opposite. Probably because he spent his childhood in military aviation towns, in which there are disasters and various emergency situations. were.
                      I also have photographs of cosmonauts .. Photo of Korolev with Gagarin, Titov, Beregovoy with an autograph. Now this is my archive.
                      And, here is the fact that the "lunar archive" of the USSR slightly declassified it is not accidental.
                      1. bayard
                        bayard 22 February 2021 03: 55
                        +1
                        Quote: brod
                        And, here is the fact that the "lunar archive" of the USSR slightly declassified it is not accidental.

                        So far, really - only slightly, the topic for the top management is too delicate. But a lot of books and publications, as well as investigative films on this topic, have been released.
                2. Avior
                  Avior 22 February 2021 02: 18
                  -1
                  Leonid Ilyich and the Politburo are long gone. Where is the exposure from knowledgeable people?
                  1. bayard
                    bayard 22 February 2021 04: 00
                    +6
                    There were enough of them - books, films, and publications. But do you really think that under Yeltsin's pro-American regime, someone could officially declare this?
                    And later, officials were extremely careful in their statements - a very painful topic for the hegemon. But there were plenty of independent researchers on this murky topic. And even Putin several times made very thick allusions to the "US lunar program", mentioning the radiation belts through which a living organism in a tin can not survive.
                    And this article, even on this site, is far from the first. There were also more detailed ones.
                    1. Avior
                      Avior 22 February 2021 06: 32
                      0
                      ... The Central Committee of the CPSU of the USSR?
                      USSR Council of Ministers?
                      Politburo?
                      USSR Academy of Sciences?
                      A squad of astronauts?
                      Dozens and hundreds of Soviet scientists, laboratories, research institutes, observatories, military men, finally?

                      And which one do you mean?
                      Who directly stated this?
                      1. bayard
                        bayard 22 February 2021 14: 12
                        +6
                        Once again, there was no direct statement from officials, because the terms of the "Lunar Deal" were in force. It was even more difficult and dangerous to make such statements after the death of the USSR and the transformation of the post-Soviet space into a colony of the West.
                        The statements were from independent researchers of the topic, who published their work and investigative films.
                        I was personally acquainted with several participants in the Soviet Lunar Program, namely, the creators of the lunar landing block. They knew it all. And they had subscriptions.
                        And for the first time I heard that the Americans did not fly anywhere, back in 1985 from the father of my classmate, who served at Baikonur since its inception. And about the fact that the "moon epic" was shot by Kubrick - also then from him. Kubrick had not yet made his statements.
                        A little later, sorting through the filing of the "Rocket and Space Technology" intelligence bulletins for those years, I came across a description with numerous photos of the American "moon spacesuit", which ... was fastened with a regular zipper on the back. And it was the clasp of the spacesuit itself, not the outer "casing" ... a solid props.
                        They did not have any asenization on such long flights (toilet), and what they showed ... was sheer stupidity. At that time, they didn’t at all imagine the peculiarities of space flight, the behavior of the organism, the effect of overloads ... and therefore they desperately screwed up.
                        For the first time their astronauts went into space only on the shuttle Columbia (Shuttle).
                        Later, I had the opportunity to talk on this topic with a number of scientists and specialists in the Soviet space industry. Everyone knew everything.
                        It's just that the topic of "the flight of the Americans to the moon" has ceased to be covered and even more so analyzed in our (and their) press. For they made so many jambs during the implementation of this performance that any interested and more or less educated person would find them at once a whole bunch of them ... and the "conquerors of the moon" had absolutely nothing to answer these questions.

                        It just so happened that in my senior school age I raved about space and especially the exploration of the moon. I dreamed of resuming flights to it, creating a scientific base ... I even counted on a super-heavy reusable rocket for this program, with landing on engines (almost like Musk's). And of course I was interested in all the details of the American Apollo program, I collected materials from all possible sources ... But already in the first year of my university, I met with a guy from Baikonur (he just grew up there), and I couldn't raise this interesting topic for me I just couldn't ... But I learned something completely different ... And later, during my life, I met with many old specialists and ... foreign intelligence officers ... who knew everything about the "US Lunar Scam". And in general, raising the topic in the scientific community about "Americans on the Moon" was considered bad form. Nobody liked this topic, because it was impossible to talk about it seriously.
                      2. Avior
                        Avior 22 February 2021 16: 04
                        0
                        These subscriptions meant nothing after 1991.
                        And that, out of these many thousands of people, not a single anti-American was found?
                      3. bayard
                        bayard 22 February 2021 16: 58
                        +4
                        There were also quite a few. Quite a few books, articles, films have been published with the disclosure of this scam. By the way, Comrade Puchkov (aka Goblin) also distinguished himself in this field - he shot his investigative film already in the late 90s ... and as if not in America.
                        If you have not met these materials, it does not mean that they are not there.
                        Their mass.
                        And in the US itself, the whistleblowers appeared much earlier (!!!) than in our country. Having familiarized themselves with their revelations, ours also grew bolder ... experts began to speak ...
                        And the Americans?
                        The Americans asked Leonov to star in ... exposing the whistleblowers ...
                        it turned out pathetic and unconvincing. But the authority of one of the first cosmonauts confused many.
                        But not for long .
                        And Leonov sold his honor with good profit - he became a shareholder of Alfa-Bank, the head of Roskosmos (or as it was called then), received grants ...
                        But one should not unduly condemn human weaknesses when the top Soviet leadership was in cahoots ... They also had their reasons ...
                      4. Avior
                        Avior 22 February 2021 17: 38
                        0
                        Is Puchkov an astronaut or from the Council of Ministers? Or from the USSR Academy of Sciences?
                        Leonov, I know such an astronaut. Puchkov - no, I don't know.
                        And you need to somehow be determined, if they are afraid of the Americans and therefore do not speak the truth, then why are they not afraid of their own in America?
                      5. bayard
                        bayard 22 February 2021 18: 55
                        +1
                        Quote: Avior
                        why in America are not afraid of their own?

                        There they are simply ignored.
                        But they try not to develop the topic - it's dangerous.
                        Quote: Avior
                        Is Puchkov an astronaut or from the Council of Ministers?

                        Quote: Avior
                        Puchkov - no, I don't know.

                        Puchkov, aka Goblin, shot the film in the 90s as a director and presenter. Quite competently and convincingly. He gave a lot of evidence and inconsistencies, interviews and testimonies of the participants of the "Lunar Scam", showed the American "space technology" of those years close by.
                        But there are better films.
                        And Puchkov, as an operative and investigator of the Ministry of Internal Affairs ... withdrew his investigation ... Moreover, when many were still silent.
                        The film is not very well known, but YouTube is.
                        Check it out and many questions will disappear by themselves.
                      6. Avior
                        Avior 22 February 2021 20: 38
                        0
                        I know who Puchkov is.
                        Only he has nothing to do with any of the discussed categories.
                        Unless, if we assume that the operatives in the regional departments were informed.
                        There they are simply ignored.

                        logical, agree ...
                        it means that none of the supposedly knowing ones was found for an example. Clear....
                        hi
                      7. bayard
                        bayard 22 February 2021 21: 32
                        +1
                        Quote: Avior
                        it means that none of the supposedly knowing ones was found for an example.

                        Well, why, for example, Comrade Serbin, the chief designer of the disengagement stage of the Molodets ICBM, the head of the admission laboratory to the PMZ (solid-fuel subdivision of Yuzhmash), will suit you?
                        This is the brother of that same General Serbin - the curator of the entire rocket and space industry since the days of Khrushchev.
                        I was familiar with him and talked about this topic.
                        The topic, again, was unpopular.
                        I also talked with other participants in the Soviet Lunar Program.
                        And they also knew.
                        And we were very sorry that this conspiracy led to the closure of our program.
                        For many, these were the best years of their lives. They were young, they faced such daunting tasks.
                        And they successfully solved them ...
                        We went to Star City for joint work with the "lunar group" of cosmonauts ... led by Gagarin. I remember one already middle-aged woman - how her eyes lit up when I asked her about this topic ...
                        And then it was over. The program was closed, the documentation was classified, all products (missiles, ships, landing modules) were ordered to be destroyed ... but the latter was not carried out, much was simply hidden in the hope of a future renewal of this topic.

                        Now, as it became known, the Yuzhnoye Design Bureau is helping the Chinese prepare their manned lunar mission ... And the lander is in the KB Museum.
                      8. Avior
                        Avior 22 February 2021 21: 48
                        0
                        This one?

                        You can give a link, where does he claim it?
                      9. bayard
                        bayard 22 February 2021 22: 11
                        0
                        No, not this one.
                        The one with whom I spoke 20 years ago, most likely already in another world.
                        He, like many others involved in the topic, said this to me personally.

                        Once again, the topic is sensitive and extremely painful for the United States, and government officials will not openly say or publish this.
                        But Putin also spoke about "doubts that the Americans were on the Moon" - about 5 years ago, pointing out that when they began to work on the Lunar program, scientists did not yet know about the existence of radiation belts. Therefore, "not a single living cell is able to overcome these belts, as well as a long interplanetary flight."
                        You can of course oppose Putin too ... he said a lot in his life ... but he spoke on this topic in 2015 - 2016, and it was broadcast on all channels ... You can search.
                        In my opinion, I rely, among other things, on the data received by me personally from people involved in the topic.
                        Moreover, I learned about this much earlier than the topic became popular.
                        I'm not trying to convince you of anything, belief in "Americans on the Moon" is a religious feeling. I am only talking about what I know and what I am absolutely sure of.
                      10. Avior
                        Avior 22 February 2021 23: 00
                        0
                        and what was the name of the one who told you this?
                        And why were they so afraid of the Americans? According to you, many thousands of people knew it "on receipt", but you cannot name a single one who announced this.
                      11. bayard
                        bayard 23 February 2021 02: 26
                        +3
                        Nobody was afraid of anyone - people just went about their business. These people are extremely disciplined by the very nature of their work - extremely secret at the time. Surnames and positions were then generally forbidden to voice.
                        These people created a nuclear missile shield.
                        Directly the person named by me was in charge of the "Laboratory of tolerance" - the final comprehensive control of the product before leaving the factory. And he was also the chief designer of the breeding stage (the most complex and critical part of the rocket) of ten warheads (and a bunch of false ones) of the Molodets missile for the BZHRK (and not only, there was a variant of a mine-underground mobile basing of the same missile).
                        They always remembered the Soviet Lunar Program with a bright smile - it was a period of participation in something completely different than combat missiles ... And it was the "lunar conspiracy" that led to the complete curtailment of all work on this topic. Moreover, the topic itself and the fact of its existence were ever classified, and all materials and developments were ordered to be destroyed (the latter was not done).
                        And the reason was simple - such a hyped "Moon Race" ran into the radiation belts and the fact that a living organism cannot pass through them.
                        And what was to be done?
                        when the press of both superpowers excitedly wrote about future flights to the moon? ...
                        Even children's magazines wrote about this as an event of the coming days ...
                        Even the Murzilka magazine !!!
                        And here - radiation belts.
                        And the Americans have complete technical unreadiness ...
                        But the Americans knew less about these belts ... and went on an adventure with falsification ...
                        It was fatal for them, for their reputation, risk - the risk of being exposed.
                        Our specialists did not expect the first "flight" ... they knew at what stage of their work, so the news was greeted with laughter - they thought it was a joke.
                        But our intelligence service, the Academy of Sciences, and specialists in long-range space communications have prepared for the second "flight".
                        And the scam was exposed.
                        Therefore, for their third "flight" a surprise was prepared for them - a whole special operation, the result of which was the capture by our ships of a dummy "descent vehicle" "Apollo-13" and its delivery on a Soviet ship to Arkhangelsk.
                        "SA" turned out to be a dummy made of (to our surprise) stainless steel. Inside, it was completely empty.
                        At first, the Americans did not know where this exhibit had disappeared, and, just in case, they began to play a performance about "an accident on board and a heroic fight for survivability" ... But then they were told WHERE the Apollo 13 spacecraft was located, whose crew "courageously fought for a life" .
                        The dummy was returned ... they decided to hush up the incident.
                        We agreed that the USSR would not send its guys to the moon, but only robots.
                        And the Americans will quickly roll up their booth.
                        So thanks to a good reason (stolen from under the nose of a dummy SA), a number of conflicts were resolved, the "Detente" policy began, and the cherry on the cake was the joint Soviet-American "flight" with a docking in orbit - "Soyuz-Apollo".
                        They released a bunch of souvenirs, stamps, badges and even cigarettes.
                        And the garage of dear Leonid Ilyich every year grew with new luxury cars.
                        I knew one guy from the "Kremlin Garage", he drove one of these cars, participated in their acceptance and bulkhead (so that the enemies would not shove anything bad). And I have no negative feelings about Leonid Brezhnev, on the contrary, I respect him - he was a good guy. And gifts from "grateful partners" are also politics.
                        Then everything was done for the benefit of the state.
                        It's a pity that the successors loved everything about ....
                        But this is a completely different, sad story.

                        And our people were not afraid of anyone. it's just that these people themselves were secret. They can't talk to them. And why?
                        Nobody asked them about it. request
                        And when asked (I for example), they told everything as it was.
                        And on the Internet there are a lot of materials on this topic.
                        American in the first place.
                        From the Apollo program participants - designers and technical specialists.
                        They simply technically could not fly anywhere.
                        Even into orbit.
                        Of course, we are talking about manned flights. They launched satellites, of course.
                      12. Avior
                        Avior 23 February 2021 02: 46
                        -1
                        Directly the person named by me

                        I asked you his name.
                        name-patronymic you don't know
                        ... These people are extremely disciplined by the very nature of their work - extremely secret at the time. Surnames and positions were then generally forbidden to voice.

                        clearly, you cannot name a single person who would publicly voice this.
                        well, I see.
                        hi
                      13. bayard
                        bayard 23 February 2021 03: 50
                        0
                        Is Putin not enough for you?
                        He talked about this too.
                        ... I also understand everything about you.

                        And I did not tell you the name and patronymic of Serbin, because I am afraid to make a mistake - it was a long time ago. But I have told you his positions and occupation, topics that he led.
                        I knew and talked to many others, but why do you need this?
                        What are you interested in?
                        I am familiar with Yangel's grand-nephew ... and my friends lived in his former apartment ... And I knew the director of the plant ... and I knew more than a dozen of shop managers ... And guys and girls from KB ...
                        And he regularly received telegrams with Beregovoy's signature on duty ...
                        And I took part in ensuring the spacecraft landings for several years ... Two hundred landings on my account.

                        And you just believe the President of the Russian Federation, who also doubts the "Americans on the Moon", and argued why it was impossible.
                        It is difficult to find a higher authority in the Russian Federation.
                        Or do you disagree?
                      14. Avior
                        Avior 23 February 2021 08: 23
                        -2
                        That is, no one from the list of people you named said this, which means that no one knew about this. Clear. Thanks for the conversation.
                      15. bayard
                        bayard 23 February 2021 14: 42
                        0
                        Quote: bayard
                        Is Putin not enough for you?
                        He talked about this too.

                        Quote: bayard
                        just believe the President of the Russian Federation, who also doubts the "Americans on the Moon" and argued why it was impossible.
                      16. Avior
                        Avior 23 February 2021 17: 30
                        +1
                        Putin, is this the one who promised retirement age not to understand?
                        So yes, not enough. But, incidentally, he also never said that the Americans were not on the moon.
                      17. bayard
                        bayard 23 February 2021 17: 38
                        +2
                        Quote: Avior
                        promised retirement age not to understand?

                        He said a lot of things.
                        And about the Americans on the moon too. yes
                        And if this is not enough for you, then what will you be happy with? lol
                        And in general, "don't scratch Honduras", there will be no itching. Everything has been forgotten, and you will forget. And then somehow it turns out awkward.
                        From your side .
                        After all, you must prove the landing smile .
                        And you flirt and blame.
                        Want to believe - believe. I understand the feelings of believers ...
                        Want to prove something - PROVE.
                        ... But there is NO proof. request
                        So let's keep quiet.
                        The embarrassment turned out to be pretty good.
                      18. Avior
                        Avior 23 February 2021 17: 43
                        +1
                        You have forgotten what you are arguing about.
                        ... The Central Committee of the CPSU of the USSR?
                        USSR Council of Ministers?
                        Politburo?
                        USSR Academy of Sciences?
                        A squad of astronauts?
                        Dozens and hundreds of Soviet scientists, laboratories, research institutes, observatories, military men, finally?

                        And which one do you mean?
                        Who directly stated this?

                        And what about proving is an easy matter. Any photo from the Moon with the Americans in the count - here's the proof. Moreover, no one was able to prove that they were not filmed on the moon ...
                        And where, by the way, is the link although there was Putin
                      19. bayard
                        bayard 23 February 2021 18: 58
                        +4
                        Quote: Avior
                        And where, by the way, is the link although there was Putin

                        I watched it, not wrote it down. And more than once.
                        Quote: Avior
                        And what about proving is an easy matter. Any photo from the Moon with the Americans in the count - here's the proof.

                        Against any such photo - a photo of the American "lunar spacesuit". lol
                        And prove further that they were on the moon, and that the "space suits" are real.
                        You can also talk about the "lunar module".
                        It is possible about "Saturn-5", and its steps.
                        It is possible about the "lunar soil" they delivered. lol
                        By the way, WHERE?
                        About originals ...
                        By the way, where are the tapes?
                        About the Apollo energy?
                        About their descent vehicles and the ballistics of their descent?
                        Without a rebound in the atmosphere - hard ... and the apparatus did not burn ... laughing
                        And the "astronauts" are so cheerful after monstrous overloads and 7 - 10 days of weightlessness in a cramped cabin ...
                        Try to answer. and we'll talk more.

                        I will ask you many more interesting questions.
                        And you will have to answer, as a witness to Apollo ... lol

                        For comparison, the Soviet program for landing and returning from the Moon provided for THREE (!!!) launches of the N-1 rocket.
                        With two (for the sake of insurance - for the life of an astronaut) landing modules. yes
                        With a lunar rover for transporting an astronaut in case of trouble with the main "lunar module".
                        With anti-radiation protection of cosmonauts (!) When passing through radiation belts.
                        With a descent vehicle capable of planing in the atmosphere, extinguishing the second space velocity before landing.
                        With a multitude of unmanned launches of Soyuz (Probes) to the Moon, with its flyby ...
                        And these suddenly took, and flew.
                        And without even breaking a sweat. lol
                        Without a toilet and any kind of sanitation ... lol
                        Without a life support system !!!
                        With tales about "oxygen atmosphere, for the sake of lowering the internal pressure in the capsule ... lol
                        Answer at least one question and we'll talk more.
                      20. Avior
                        Avior 23 February 2021 19: 43
                        -2
                        The Apollo program is full of photos and videos and no one has yet been able to refute them.
                        https://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/index.html
                      21. bayard
                        bayard 23 February 2021 20: 38
                        +3
                        Many have succeeded.
                        Continue. yes bully
                      22. Avior
                        Avior 23 February 2021 21: 58
                        +1
                        You see, you have nothing to answer but general words. There is not a single case where the reality of photographs was denied by a professional expert within a legally responsible procedure, for example, a judicial one.
                        If the Lunar program is fake, there would have long been a legal prosecution of the responsible persons - money for it came from the budget. But this is not the case. And it should be - America is the country of lawsuits, there they can sue for a glass of coffee at McDonald's for being hot.
                        And the fact that the clicker is for the hype and for the sake of money, do not take it seriously. This is the usual gossip for money from publishers, tabloids.
                        Good luck, anyway you could not answer a specific question, what's the point of further wasting time
                        hi
                      23. bayard
                        bayard 23 February 2021 22: 15
                        +2
                        Quote: Avior
                        America is a country of lawsuits

                        So ... smile
                        Quote: Avior
                        there for a glass of coffee at McDonald's can sue for being hot.

                        Nuka Nuka ... lol
                        Quote: Avior
                        And the fact that the clicker is for the hype and for the sake of money, do not take it seriously. This is the usual gossip for money from publishers, tabloids.

                        Oops belay
                        How so ?
                        In the country of lawsuits, and they did not sue, they did not plant a single exposer of the "Lunar Scam" ?!
                        laughing
                        How so ?
                        Not a single qualified lawyer was found? smile
                        To sue the villain who, for the sake of hype and profit, denigrates the "bright image of the United States"? laughing
                        You really amused me.
                        But at the same time, they did not give more than one proof that the Americans really visited Luda.

                        Quote: Avior
                        You see, you have nothing to answer,

                        But you collect your thoughts, find something more convincing.
                        Well, at least prove the performance of the F-1 engine in normal conditions.
                        The efficiency of hydrogen engines of the second ... and the third stage .... the authenticity of the "lunar spacesuit" ... where did the "lunar soil" go, which even included a petrified tree lol ... where and how the American "astronauts" wrote and wrote during their missions ...
                        Enough for now .
                        Can you answer?
                        Take your time, prepare well.
                      24. Avior
                        Avior 23 February 2021 22: 42
                        +1
                        It’s you collect your thoughts and try to find a case of accusation of specific people from the lunar program in fraud with the lunar program in order to steal budget money. So that the defendant could file a counterclaim for libel, for a large amount.
                        I do not know this, I see only general reasoning and all kinds of hints that do not fall under a counterclaim for libel. And all this general reasoning about the wrong shadows in the photographs is calculated for gullible simpletons.
                      25. bayard
                        bayard 24 February 2021 06: 54
                        +4
                        So, for the entire post-affliction period, not a single claim from NASA and the US government to the whistleblowers of this adventure.
                        Right ?
                        Right .
                        They just pretend it doesn't concern them.
                        Right ?
                        Right .
                        Do you remember the repeated direct (in physics) appeals to the American "astronauts" - the participants in that scam? With the demands to answer directly - were they on the moon? With offers to repent and denounce NASA for forgery?
                        These were "direct insults to the heroes of the nation," right?
                        These "astronauts" even rushed at them into a fight ... lol
                        Do you remember? smile
                        And not a single lawsuit about insult to honor and dignity, about slander? !!!
                        How so ?
                        In the "land of lawsuits"?
                        Where does such a stoic endure of the burdens of exposure and "slander" come from?
                        Yes, because in the event of a trial, an expert commission must be drawn up.
                        Independent.
                        Not controlled by the US government and NASA.
                        For the US government and NASA in this case will be the defendants.
                        The case will resonate ...
                        Do they need it?
                        If they cannot prove their case in court?
                        After all, they know that they cannot refute the arguments of the whistleblowers.
                        We'll have to give evidence.
                        Make an independent examination.
                        ... Maybe that's why all the "lunar" soil disappeared?
                        All the "originals" of the "lunar missions" films?
                        All (!!!) technical documentation of the Apollo program?
                        After all, "the United States is a country of lawsuits." wink

                        So you didn't answer my questions.
                        And you cannot answer.
                        For it is impossible to prove the unprovable by definition.
                        All the evidence against you is irrefutable.
                        Once again :
                        - soil,
                        - a spacesuit,
                        - booster rocket in all its components,
                        - life support and life support system,
                        - lunar module,
                        - the descent vehicle,
                        - the incredible cheerfulness of the "astronauts" immediately after landing ...

                        You did not bother to answer any of these questions, although I have repeated them several times.
                        Can you imagine what the "circus with horses" would be like when the case was being considered in court?
                        Therefore, I repeat the advice - DO NOT CHECK HONDURAS, otherwise you will get gangrene instead of a pimple.
                        hi
                      26. Avior
                        Avior 24 February 2021 08: 17
                        0
                        And the lunar soil is all in place

                        https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Лаборатория_проб_лунного_грунта


                        And show it to strangers.
                        And the astronauts after landing look exactly the same as the Soviet cosmonauts, above I gave a lot of photos of Soyuz 18 and 19.
                        And the fact that you do not know the elementary, well, that's your problem.
                        You even the name of the person who allegedly told you that the Americans were not on the moon, you cannot name what else to talk to you about. You cannot answer a single question in essence, a continuous copy-paste.
                        But people like you "conspirators" in the States are well aware of what a libel suit is, which is why none of them even tries to make legally significant statements about alleged "deception". It's one thing to scratch your tongue, another thing to answer for your statements.
                      27. bayard
                        bayard 24 February 2021 09: 23
                        +1
                        Quote: Avior
                        And the lunar soil is all in place

                        And where is this place?
                        The fact that he was (in the sense there was some kind of soil) is undoubtedly. yes
                        And pieces of it were even presented to some important persons ... lol
                        And take these persons, and give this pebble for examination ... repeat
                        And "lo and behold !!!" ... the stone turns out to be a piece of petrified wood ...
                        ... In truth, the paths of the dusty lunar paths of the American cosmonautics are inscrutable ...
                        Quote: Avior
                        And the astronauts after landing look exactly like the Soviet cosmonauts.

                        Are you out of your mind? !!! belay
                        I see that your condition is inadequate, and your conscience is amputated, like appendicitis.
                        Further discussion is meaningless and useless.
                      28. Avior
                        Avior 24 February 2021 10: 03
                        +1
                        here is this place, they wrote to you
                        https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Лаборатория_проб_лунного_грунта
                        Lunar Sample Laboratory Facility is a laboratory complex created by NASA for storing, processing and studying lunar soil samples delivered to Earth during flights under the Apollo program.

                        The laboratory is located on the territory of the Lyndon Johnson Space Center, and stores most (about 75%) of the 382 kilograms of lunar soil obtained during expeditions to the moon.

                        Any researcher can apply for soil samples for study, all applications are considered by a special commission, the laboratory sends out about 400 samples annually. Lunar soil samples are also provided to educational institutions [1].

                        analyze further your ignorance smile
                        And pieces of it were even presented to some important persons ... lol
                        And take these persons, and give this pebble for examination ... feel
                        And "lo and behold !!!" ... the stone turns out to be a piece of petrified wood ...

                        did not give any pieces, and he was not an important person at that time.
                        This story is an invention of his heirs. For gullible simpletons, not burdened with knowledge :)
                        it was not a gift to the prime minister. Mr. Willem Drees had been in retirement for over ten years at the time of Apollo 11's flight - he left this post in 1958 .... at the time of the alleged donation, grandfather was 83 years old, and grandfather was deaf ... There is no evidence of dated topics the time that the US Ambassador presented a stone from the Moon to the Minister of Honor. Moreover, no one ever gave moon stones to anyone else privately .... After the death of the honorary grandfather (at the age of 101), his heirs found an object in his grandfather's belongings and handed it over to the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. This is an art museum - not a scientific one, not a space museum. And apparently when donating the stone, the relatives said that it was a piece of the moon. Where they got it from is unknown. Maybe their grandfather told them. Maybe they came up with it themselves.

                        Even the art museum over time became suspicious and ordered an examination. But the gullible simpletons did not give all these details, they were "edited", as Miss Diana said in the famous film. They were given pieces, but they did not look for the full story, the wrong audience. What for? Many knowledge - many sorrows! smile
                        Are you out of your mind? !!! belay

                        I do, but do you have problems with Russian, or you could not master the text entirely?
                        I wrote to you. Need to chew? Okay, load with knowledge, suddenly it will help.
                        Here is a photo immediately after the landing of the Soviet spacecraft Soyuz-18.
                        Commander: Klimuk Pyotr Ilyich
                        Flight Engineer: Vitaly Sevastyanov

                        This is the second expedition to the Salyut-4 station, lasting 63 days, in 1975.
                        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Союз-18
                        And this is how the Soviet cosmonauts really look after being in space for 63 days immediately after landing. Are they inferior to the Americans?

                        Yes, then they were already put on a stretcher - this photo is given in the article with an incorrect caption - in fact, the photo was taken on July 26, 1975, and not in June. The photo clearly shows the atypically mismatched clothes of astronauts on a stretcher - one is dressed in black, the other is in a white overalls, which we see in the photo of the landing.
                        But immediately after landing, as you can see, the astronauts felt energized no worse than the Americans.
                        So do you understand?
                        I advise you to throw more knowledge yourself into the baggage, and the world will turn out to be easier, all these conspiracy theories are from ignorance. Good luck!
                        hi
                    2. skobars
                      skobars 24 February 2021 22: 53
                      -1
                      In fact, after the collapse of the USSR, we bought the soil collected by our lunar rovers for a cheap price. So they show him.
                    3. Avior
                      Avior 24 February 2021 22: 59
                      +1
                      I suspect that the soil collected by the lunar rovers remained on the lunar rovers, they did not come back, they remained on the moon.
                      and there was not enough of that soil even on one of the large stones that you see in the photo
                      "Luna-16", "Luna-20" and "Luna-24" delivered soil from three regions of the Moon: the Sea of ​​Abundance, the mainland region near the crater Amegino and the Sea of ​​Crises in the amount of 324 g, and it was transferred to the GEOKHI RAS for research and storage
                3. Avior
                  Avior 24 February 2021 08: 24
                  0
                  ... So, for the entire post-affliction period, not a single claim from NASA and the US government to the whistleblowers of this adventure.

                  Strictly opposite
                  There is not a single legally significant disclosure statement from a supporter of the lunar conspiracy, only chatter at a scratch level that does not fall under the laws of libel.
                  Therefore, knowledgeable people treat such "whistleblowers" accordingly
                  "In the United States, three years after the astronauts landed on the moon, a book was published in which it was stated that there was no flight to the moon ... The author and publisher made good money on deliberate lies."

                  Do you know whose opinion this was and when it was expressed?
                  But this?
                  美国东部时间1969年7月20日22时56分,航天员阿姆斯特朗爬下“阿波罗11号”的舷梯,在月球表面踩下了深深的印记。此后三年,美国共完成6次载人登月,将12名航天员送上月球,带回约382公斤月球样品,获取了大量科学数据。

                  Are they also in a conspiracy?
                  Therefore, it is not surprising that the talkers, who were drunk in the bar who pushed the crazy theory, can be answered by the program participants in the same way as they respond to a drunken chatter with their tongues - to give them a face. That one of the astronauts, already aged, did as he did.
                4. bayard
                  bayard 24 February 2021 09: 12
                  +1
                  Boring, unconvincing, deceitful.
                  Quote: Avior
                  ... So, for the entire post-affliction period, not a single claim from NASA and the US government to the whistleblowers of this adventure.

                  Strictly opposite
                  There is not a single legally significant disclosure statement from a supporter of the lunar conspiracy, only chatter at a scratch level that does not fall under the laws of libel.

                  Oh oh
                  Do you accuse the citizens of the United States (and even of other states) that they did not file a lawsuit ... against their state?
                  To the court of jurisdiction ... of your own state?
                  Are you out of your mind?
                  The materials published by them are already a civil and human feat.
                  But the fact that the State did not sue for libel and insult to dignity is completely ... completely different.
                  In the "land of lawsuits". bully
                  Where "they'll sue for a cup of coffee." laughing
                  And the Americans themselves, in order to forestall such revelations, removed self-exposure. yes
                  In Hollywood.
                  In "Bondiana" - "Diamonds forever." bully
                  This film became the same - the "third series" of the documentary Soviet film directed by Zorin - "The Mysterious Billionaire".
                  Then, when publishing this film, in the second episode, he promised to tell and show all the main and most interesting things (!) In the third episode ... which never came out.
                  But it was filmed by the Americans themselves in "Bondiana".
                  Why did it happen?
                  Because it was Zorin who was sent to the United States as a negotiator. yes soldier
                  And the negotiations were successful.

                  ... I love Zorin's jokes. good
                5. Avior
                  Avior 24 February 2021 10: 18
                  0
                  there were no "revelations of the lunar deception".
                  There were "value judgments" that were not subject to libel prosecution.
                  And your American fellow conspirators are well aware of the difference in these concepts, unlike you. Therefore, they make sure that their chatter, on the one hand, makes an impression on the simpletons, on the other, they also carefully monitor that it does not fall under a libel suit.
                  so what about the quotes I gave? what do these people and organization do not suit you as confirmation of the lunar program? were they incompetent or were they intimidated?
  2. ccsr
    ccsr 23 February 2021 19: 56
    +1
    Quote: bayard
    Answer at least one question and we'll talk more.

    Nifiga they will not answer, I have known all their arguments for a long time, and the holy belief that Americans cannot cheat.
    By the way, these are the cameras the Americans use now - from a spacesuit, this is the only way to point the camera correctly, and not from the chest.
  3. ccsr
    ccsr 23 February 2021 19: 51
    +1
    Quote: Avior
    Any photo from the Moon with the Americans in the count - here's the proof.

    Since you believe in American photography, you will have no difficulty in answering these simple questions:
    1. Is it possible to "quickly" replace cassettes by a person in a spacesuit, as described in the NASA official article? (it turned out that it is quite possible, approx.)
    2. Is it possible to correctly set the aperture and shutter speed (I'm not talking about sharpness) on a modified Hasselblad 500EL strapped to the belly? More precisely, to the chest?
    3. Where are the astronauts' cartridge pockets? Or trunks? And if they are not there, then why are two NASA "specialists" broadcasting about the change of cassettes?
    4. Is it possible with the same shutter speed and aperture (I suppose, both shutter speed and aperture, if they could be set where, then only with your fingers, inside the lunar module) take diverse pictures with such quality as NASA demonstrates?
    5. How can you sharpen a 250 mm telephoto camera strapped to your chest?
    6. What kind of shots were taken with a telephoto camera? Are they on the Internet?
    7. Are there any stereo footage made by Kodak Stereo Close-UpCamera posted on the Internet?

    None of those who believe in the Americans answered about the heating of the camera and cassettes. Can you try?
  4. Avior
    Avior 23 February 2021 22: 03
    0
    The falsity of photographs is in no way proved by your ignorance of any peculiarities of working with a camera.
    As far as I remember, NASA posted 26 thousand photos. So far there is no evidence that they are all fake, and within the framework of a responsible legal procedure, there is nothing to say. Even one thing. A photo from 26 thousand completely refutes all reasoning about supposedly shadows or cassettes.
  5. your1970
    your1970 24 February 2021 07: 18
    -1
    The problem with this dispute is that regardless of whether the United States flew to the moon or not - USSR and its leadership turns out to be head over heels in ....
    - If the United States did not fly, then they missed a gorgeous opportunity to look for the United States in feces. For any reason and without ..... And they lied to their own people, confirming the US flights to the moon .. What is worse of these positions, I don't know
    - If the United States flew, then the leadership of the USSR was not able to prioritize and distribute forces ... First, bang a mountain of resources - and then: "Oh, let's not fly, why do we need that Moon .... !!!!!!" (figuratively!) ......

    Both options show the inability of the leadership of the USSR for strategic thinking.
  6. ccsr
    ccsr 24 February 2021 12: 59
    0
    Quote: your1970
    Both options show the inability of the leadership of the USSR for strategic thinking.

    Just strategically, they acted wisely - they immediately cut off our lunar program, and turned cash flows to our other projects. Not only that, they could blackmail the Americans for a long time without putting anything in print, but bluffing that we have all this, and the Americans in the seventies were silk, judging by the end of the Vietnam War, presidential negotiations, the Helsinki accords, grain sales to the USSR. So everything was not so bad for us, especially since the Americans themselves suspected something was wrong, and it seemed that we had nothing to do with it. After the collapse of the USSR, everything flooded, and now only naive people believe that diapers can be used in a lunar cabin. By the way, there is a huge question - where did the moon dust from the spacesuits, which is clearly visible in the pictures, go?
  7. your1970
    your1970 24 February 2021 13: 27
    0
    Quote: ccsr

    It was just strategically that they acted wisely - they immediately cut off our lunar program, and turned

    If at once - there would be no questions ... Otherwise, first build N-1, and only then cut
  8. Plastmaster
    Plastmaster 26 February 2021 19: 13
    0
    Quote: your1970
    one and the other - show the inability of the leadership of the USSR for strategic thinking.

    Sorry, but there is only one answer. You pardon me, you look like a complete sorovsky dabil. No offense. Simple, strategy. Ugh, I'll go wash my hands.
  9. your1970
    your1970 27 February 2021 11: 20
    +1
    Quote: Plastmaster
    I'll go wash my hands.

    Hands must be washed ... Even children know that, and even more so it's time for you ...
    Z. Y. Before splashing saliva - CAREFULLY read my post and the one I replied to, yeah ...
  10. ccsr
    ccsr 24 February 2021 12: 44
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    Even one thing.

    I immediately realized that you will not be able to communicate anything intelligible about the questions raised. But then at least answer, why was it necessary to publish photographs taken on the Earth, to place them in catalogs under numbers, like those taken on the Moon? Why was this deception done, if you do not accept the version that they were trying to hide the lunar scam.
    Here's some more to think about:
    The total declared time spent by the Americans on the Moon does not even reach 5 thousand minutes. And they brought almost 6 thousand photos. How was this possible if, in addition to photographing, astronauts on the moon had to perform a lot of other planned necessary work?
    In addition, lunar photographs are made at such a high technical level, which cannot be achieved by photographing "on the go", in between times. To get a perfectly composed shot and focus it accurately, preliminary preparation is necessary. And in order to get one correctly composed and focused frame, photographing "from the navel", that is, from the chest and not looking through the viewfinder, which was removed on the lunar modification of Hasselblad cameras, several other frames must be screwed up. That is, for one successful shot of the same scene, taken blindly, there should be 2-3 unsuccessful options. And even more. (Where are those bad shots? How many were taken?)

    Lunar machine gun *. Or how did the Americans "shoot" an incredible amount of lunar frames?
    https://photo-vlad.livejournal.com/64618.html
  11. Avior
    Avior 24 February 2021 12: 47
    0
    So, is there a legally valid examination of moon images?
    if not, what are we talking about?
  12. ccsr
    ccsr 24 February 2021 13: 27
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    So, is there a legally valid examination of moon images?
    if not, what are we talking about?

    I, as an engineer, do not care what the crooks ask for there, because I already see many technical inconsistencies even in the most simple questions. And if you ask a more complex question, how did they start from the Moon and how they verified the accuracy of the deviation from the module axis and the accuracy of seconds at launch, then many supporters of the version will scratch their turnips. No one has yet been able to explain this, and from the point of view of the remaining fuel at a minimum, they could not dock even in manual mode.
  13. Avior
    Avior 24 February 2021 16: 46
    -1
    As an engineer, it is not clear to me how one can make such drastic statements in things in which one is not a specialist.
    And as an ordinary sober-minded person it is not clear how one can reason, having listened only to one-sided.
    If the supporters of the lunar conspiracy theory, before replicating other supporters, were seriously interested in how their opponents respond, the conspiracy theory would quickly crumble
    For example, it really took me half an hour to be completely convinced of the complete inconsistency of the thesis about "cheerful" Americans - with all the evidence and photographs
  14. ccsr
    ccsr 24 February 2021 19: 00
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    For example, it really took me half an hour to be completely convinced of the complete inconsistency of the thesis about "cheerful" Americans - with all the evidence and photographs

    And what about the photographs did not work out so easily?
    Well, then try to refute the Americans, who were not summoned to court for false information, who claimed that the original lunar images were destroyed:
    “Johnson also noticed some weirdness with the pictures.
    One day he was walking through a secret building in the Center, which usually happened rarely, Ken noticed artists retouching the "sky" in various photos. Camo by
    This was not unusual for itself, since the photos for press releases were completely cleaned up.
    Johnston was embarrassed that it was not the photos that were retouched at the same time, but
    photographic negatives, and this meant that by this radical operation the original data could never be reproduced in the form in which they were obtained in the original. (Traces of which Hogland personally observed in AS 16-121-19438 at the Greenbelt Center) fig. 4-27).
    All of this took an even more sinister turn in 1972, by the end of the piloting
    programs. Johnston was summoned to the office of Bad Laskav, he was
    Head of the LRL Documentation Department. Bo the time of this meeting Laskava said
    that from the staff quarters of HACA were issued instructions (through Michael Duke, whom Laskava and Johnston obeyed in HACA) to destroy all copies of the original lunar photographs.
    Johnston was stunned that someone could order to destroy the official documents of the first steps of mankind on another planet. He protested, asked for permission to transfer the photographs to various universities or foundations, but he was told that "there is no chance." The order was clear - he had to destroy all four sets, which consisted of literally tens of thousands of pictures of the moon taken by the Apollo astronauts.
    Johnston considered this state of affairs unfair. Eventually, after further protests, he backed down and DESTROYED three complete sets of data. But guilt haunted him, and he decided to keep the one remaining complete set. He kept SOME photographs and negatives for himself. " (pp 185-186)

    "Dark Mission. NASA's Secret History."
    R. Hoagland, M. Bara
  15. Avior
    Avior 24 February 2021 19: 26
    -1
    You didn't succeed. Your heap of questions only says that you do not know the answers to them - the conspiracy theorists did not bring them, and you yourself did not even try to search.
    Not to mention that the question is not a statement ...
  16. ccsr
    ccsr 24 February 2021 19: 56
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    You didn't succeed. Your heap of questions only says

    Do you have the "courage" to assert that the g-forces experienced by astronauts when entering the Earth's atmosphere and the g-forces of our astronauts descending from near-earth orbit are the same, and the given snapshots prove that this is so?
    After all, you cleverly dodged the comparison of what overloads the crews experience at different speeds of convergence, and this explains why they have different states. So your pictures do not say anything.
    By the way, I asked you a bunch of questions - this is just a small fraction of what specialists of different profiles ask, including in photography. For example, why is the Hasselblad 500 drastically different from the camera designs that Americans used after the Apollo flights?
  17. Avior
    Avior 24 February 2021 20: 01
    0
    take a closer look at the photo in the article
    There is not a word about overloads, only about the time spent in orbit.
    And about questions, it's just a problem of your ignorance.
    study and the questions will disappear.
  18. ccsr
    ccsr 24 February 2021 20: 05
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    There is not a word about overloads, only about the time spent in orbit.

    So you still have not understood that it is the overloads that affect the health and appearance of the crew, it is not for nothing that they are checked in training for the maximum possible.
    Quote: Avior
    And about questions, it's just a problem of your ignorance.

    I didn't see that you bounced your answers off the teeth, so you are clearly arrogant about your "knowledge".
  19. Avior
    Avior 24 February 2021 22: 10
    0
    once again, the article argues that the problem is in orbital timing.
    read it again.
    what about overloads ...
    The descent vehicle landed southwest of the city of Gorno-Altaysk, 829 kilometers north of the border with China, in the East Kazakhstan region at an altitude of 1200 m on the snow-covered slope of Mount Teremok-3 (50 ° 50 ′ N 83 ° 25 ′ east HGЯO) [8] [9] and began to slide down. 152 m before the cliff, the dangerous descent was stopped thanks to the parachute caught in the vegetation.

    Having landed in the snow at a temperature of -7 ° C, the cosmonauts put on life overalls. V. Lazarev, having no reliable information about the place of their landing and fearing that they landed in China, following the instructions, burned documents concerning some experiments that were planned to be carried out in orbit.

    The rescue helicopter could not hover at the landing site and dropped the rescue team on the ice of the Uba River, located at the foot of Mount Teremok-3 [9]. An attempt to climb the side of the mountain caused an avalanche that covered the entire group, the second group of rescuers dug up their comrades (there were no casualties).

    the astronauts after landing had more than hard times, the conditions were extreme
    ... the descent vehicle is on the edge of an abyss and did not fall just because the parachute canopy caught on the trees. It is not safe to be in the machine. Therefore, Lazarev and Makarov took off their spacesuits, changed into a heat-protective suit (TZK-10) and a "Trout" diving suit. With the help of NAZ means - a wearable emergency supply, a fire was lit on a piece of thermal protection that had broken away from the apparatus.
    Dusk was approaching. From the AN-12 planes that had flown in, parachute groups (PDGs), which included doctors, began to prepare for the landing. The cosmonauts were informed of their readiness for landing.
    - I strongly object to the landing. As a parachutist instructor, I believe that people can be killed with a high probability. Around rocks, snow obstructions and avalanches are possible. In addition, the wind is fifteen meters per second. It will scatter everyone. No one will get close to us, and even someone will die, ”Lazarev demanded sharply. .....

    And before that, the cosmonauts experienced more than 20-fold overload and cardiac arrest, which did not prevent them from getting out of the capsule on their own and holding out for a day with minimal help.
    overloads of 20g fell on his crew. It is not known exactly what magnitude the gravity, pressing on the astronauts, reached at its peak. Vasily Lazarev said that experts, analyzing telemetry, noted that for a few seconds it grew to insane 26g. At this moment, the cosmonauts lost their eyesight and cardiac arrest was recorded.

    As you can see, the super-extreme overload that was not planned by anyone, beyond the limit for a person, did not prevent the astronauts from escaping in extreme conditions.
    and you
    it is overloads that affect the health and appearance of the crew

    hi
  20. ccsr
    ccsr 25 February 2021 13: 19
    0
    Quote: Avior
    once again, the article argues that the problem is in orbital timing.

    So they had simulators in orbit and they kept themselves in good shape, and the Americans didn't even have a toilet, and when overloaded, all the shit got out of them - the experts also asked a question about this.
    Quote: Avior
    And before that, the cosmonauts experienced more than 20-fold overload and cardiac arrest,

    This is a short-term overload, lasting seconds, and the descent takes much longer, and there are completely different restrictions. So there is no need to speculate on short-term tests, but it is necessary to look at real overloads and their duration.
  21. Avior
    Avior 25 February 2021 13: 26
    0
    Let's link to the scientific evidence for what you have learned about overloading.
  22. ccsr
    ccsr 25 February 2021 13: 52
    0
    Quote: Avior
    Let's link to the scientific evidence for what you have learned about overloading.

    Read popular science literature:
    If preventive measures are not used during the flight, then in the first hours and days after landing (the period of readaptation to terrestrial conditions), the following complex of changes is observed in a person who has completed a long space flight:

    1. Violation of metabolic processes, especially water-salt metabolism, which is accompanied by relative dehydration of tissues, a decrease in the volume of circulating blood, a decrease in the content of a number of elements in tissues, in particular potassium and calcium;
    2. Violation of the oxygen regime of the body during physical exertion;
    3. Violation of the ability to maintain an upright posture in statics and dynamics; a feeling of heaviness in body parts (surrounding objects are perceived as unusually heavy; there is a lack of training in the dosage of muscle efforts);
    4. Violation of hemodynamics during work of medium and high intensity; possible pre-fainting and fainting states after the transition from a horizontal position to a vertical one;
    5. Decrease in immunobiological resistance (weakening of immunity);
    vestibulovegetative disorders.
    .....
    According to statistics, astronauts rarely experience overloads exceeding 4g.

    https://ria.ru/20090930/186999037.html

    It's hard to believe that you yourself are not able to find it.
  23. Avior
    Avior 26 February 2021 22: 23
    0
    There is no way that the state of the astronauts is caused by their overload, as you previously stated.
  24. Plastmaster
    Plastmaster 26 February 2021 19: 09
    0
    Excuse me 26000 Photos in what mode and from where?
  25. The eye of the crying
    The eye of the crying 23 February 2021 09: 28
    +1
    Quote: bayard
    Puchkov, aka Goblin, shot the film in the 90s as a director and presenter. Quite competently and convincingly.


    In the 90s, the Goblin did not shoot anything. And for some reason you do not provide any links to the film, or even its title%)
  • ccsr
    ccsr 22 February 2021 11: 41
    -1
    Quote: bayard
    Too many people knew and understood the meaning of what happened. But everyone involved in astronautics was advised ... to forget, be silent, and do something more useful.

    As for "a lot of people knew" this is clearly too much, because, of course, experts understood, and even then in certain areas of astronautics. But the fact that even in parts of the space direction this issue was completely ignored, I know this - judging by the seventies.
    Quote: bayard
    Leonov?
    Separate sad conversation.

    Yes, this shame of Soviet cosmonautics, and it was not in vain that Kamanin talked about Leonov's moral character, he very unequivocally characterized this person as clearly slippery, especially after the incident with the traffic police.
    Quote: bayard
    They were just disciplined and responsible people with a nondisclosure agreement.
    Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they kept this subscription ...

    Well, this is also too much - most likely no one wanted to be the first to declare that the king was naked, because he understood the consequences of such a step for himself. But little by little, many began to speak, and publications and books appeared, so that a literate person can get the necessary information. As an example, I cited the opinion of Shilnikov, who is a well-known specialist in the field of television systems, and he definitely did not believe that the Americans were able to make such a transfer.
  • victor50
    victor50 22 February 2021 13: 47
    -2
    Quote: bayard
    They were just disciplined and responsible people with a nondisclosure agreement.
    Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they kept this subscription ...

    Could you tell us which state secret item this information refers to? Especially after the collapse of the USSR. laughing Only a real list of information constituting a state secret, and not the one that is used in ward No. 6
    1. bayard
      bayard 22 February 2021 14: 52
      +2
      Quote: bayard
      everyone involved in astronautics was advised ... to forget, to be silent, and to do something more useful.

      All people related to astronautics and rocketry were ALREADY under a subscription. And the recommendations of comrades from the Special Department, as a rule, were taken seriously and with understanding. Besides the Moon, they had more than enough to do and tasks.

      And your flirting and antics, speaks only of engagement, ignorance and lack of curiosity.
      A colleague said well about this:
      Quote: ccsr
      most likely no one wanted to be the first to declare that the king was naked, because he understood the consequences of such a step for himself. But little by little, many began to speak, and publications and books appeared, so that a literate person can get the necessary information. As an example, I cited the opinion of Shilnikov, who is a well-known specialist in the field of television systems, and he definitely did not believe that the Americans were able to make such a transfer.
      1. victor50
        victor50 22 February 2021 17: 38
        -3
        Quote: bayard
        And the recommendations of comrades from the Special Department, as a rule, were taken seriously and with understanding.

        You'd better talk about the moon and that there were no Americans there. And then delights like the quoted one completely betray your incompetence (apparently, in everything) and lack of any knowledge, except delirium. At least read on the topic on the same Internet, if the serious materials are idiosyncratic. lol
        1. bayard
          bayard 22 February 2021 18: 31
          +2
          Quote: victor50
          You'd better talk about the moon and that there were no Americans there.

          Are you too lazy to re-read the article?
          Drive "Lunar Scam" into a search engine and enjoy reading?
          Or by seeing a whole cycle of films exposing this "circus of neophytes"?
          Read the books of American researchers, if ours do not come to you.
          And learn.
          A person who taught physics well at school does not believe in such nonsense.

          ... And now you are a funny person (person?), You don't believe in UFOs, but in ... "Americans on the Moon" - ardently ... lol
          Well, take a closer look at Saturn 5.
          Count if you taught arithmetic ...
          Look at the 1st stage engines. bully
          Second. lol
          I am not even talking about the third one, but you will look anyway.
          On Apollo itself in all its glory and components. Consider especially its life support systems and energy.
          On "moon suits" - CAREFULLY ... but carefully laughing , I almost broke my navel when I realized what I was seeing. yes
          On the Apollo descent vehicle after landing and for comparison on the Soyuz spacecraft. At the same time, keep in mind that the Soyuz spacecraft entered the dense layers of the atmosphere at the 1st space speed (slightly less), and the Apollo at the 2nd cosmic speed - 7,9 km / s versus 11,2 km / s ... And take a closer look at HOW burned one and the other.
          Look at HOW the "astronauts" behave after a long flight in a cramped capsule, in zero gravity, after severe overloads ... and compare with our astronauts.
          The Americans galloped and shone with health and cheerfulness like a new samovar.
          They just DIDN'T KNOW how the astronaut feels after landing. !!!

          But you don't need knowledge. smile
          Not evidence of planetary fraud. bully
          wink Right ?
          But you have Nothing to argue your skepticism. yes
          For you have no proof to the contrary.
          No one .
          Nothing.
          No "lunar soil" weighing several hundredweight. lol
          No film of the original "astronauts on the moon". laughing
          None .
          No technical documentation for the Saturn-5 rocket.
          Not for the entire Apollo program.
          EVERYTHING IS GONE! request
          Apparently stolen by aliens in which you do not believe. yes repeat
          And they didn't even leave traces of hooves.

          You are not an engineer. smile
          They had nothing to do with cosmonautics and rocketry. request
          There are also serious problems with education and upbringing. No.
          And dare to speak out on issues of cosmic (in the literal sense) importance, planetary scale ... wassat
          You have to be more modest.
          And measure your scale and depth (and significance) of the issue.
          Do not shine with your ignorance.
        2. victor50
          victor50 22 February 2021 19: 06
          -2
          Quote: bayard
          There are also serious problems with education and upbringing.

          Napoleon, return to the ward! They'll give you a pill! And don’t waste your energy, I don’t read your nonsense! I’m just having fun - to enjoy, as you are trying to convince someone of your delirium, And lose your temper, because not everyone is still sick, unfortunately, obviously! laughing
        3. bayard
          bayard 22 February 2021 21: 55
          +1
          The amoeba choked with bile. lol
  • Plastmaster
    Plastmaster 26 February 2021 19: 05
    0
    Quote: Cosm22
    And that, there was not a single sane person in the USSR?

    Yes, they were, they were. Corn, humpback, drunkard, redhead, birch, rook, Puchineg's sidekicks. Fear the space god, write this. At night he will come and American stones from the moon and fill up.
  • ccsr
    ccsr 20 February 2021 17: 17
    -4
    Quote: Cosm22
    And the ultimate goal of such a stuffing will be achieved - people will again argue to the point of hoarseness about whether the Americans were on the moon, and not remember the problems of Roscosmos.

    You are hoping in vain - no one will argue to the point of hoarseness, because all competent specialists have already understood that the Americans, even in more than fifty years, cannot repeat what they easily managed to do in the sixties. Despite the fact that during this time a technological breakthrough was made, the United States is an economic giant, but they cannot reproduce something like that. And the failure with the shuttle, as well as the absence of its own orbital station, best of all confirm the conclusions of the author of the article, and you cannot refute them with anything. Although, in my opinion, he also has some dubious conclusions, especially in terms of the Brezhnev era. But in general, his doubts are fully justified, and you are not in a position to refute them, so you got off with only a routine preparation.
    1. Cosm22
      Cosm22 20 February 2021 20: 04
      +6
      1. Why repeat the already passed stage? Several landings have already been made on the Moon. The goal was achieved. Now why? Landing just to land? People have nowhere to put money?
      2. Precisely because a technological breakthrough has been made, the United States does not even think of repeating its past success. What for? They have already covered this path. New tasks and projects are on the agenda. Thanks to new technologies, the prospect of building lunar objects is quite real. Hence the Artemis and Gateway projects, since mankind already has the scientific and technical potential to create a lunar infrastructure and a lunar station.
      3. About failure - to the wrong address. The failure was with Buran, the only demonstration flight of which did not bring any practical benefit, except for the development of LV technologies for the further production of Zeniths.
      As for the Shuttles, the shuttles did a great job. Without them, there would be no manned cosmonautics in Russia today, there would simply be nowhere to fly. If someone has a short memory, I will remind you: during the construction of the station, the Shuttles transported 312 tons of cargo, while the Russian launch vehicles delivered only 45,6 tons to the ISS.
      4. I have no desire to refute this nonsense. If the author (and you, apparently) considers the entire top leadership of the USSR to be fools, this is his own business. I take a different point of view. In yesterday's commentary on a similar topic, I presented it. All the top political and military leadership of the USSR, all the scientific elite of the Soviet Union, all recognized the fact of the US landing on the moon without the slightest doubt or hesitation. Why this dirt pops up again and again - I have already given the answer. Because you need to blurt out the topic of the failures of the Roscosmos strategy and divert the conversation aside. Will not work.
      At least with me.
      Finally, think about this. The landing of the Americans took place at the time of the maximum space confrontation between the two powers. At the time of the space race. Every Apollo launch in the USSR was closely watched. Both civilian and military. What do you think, if there was even the slightest chance to convict the Americans of lying, the Soviet leadership would not have done it? If only had a tiny clue?
      But there was no clue. And now no. Except for such articles.
      1. mole
        mole 20 February 2021 22: 59
        -1
        Quote: Cosm22
        3. About failure - to the wrong address. The failure was with Buran, the only demonstration flight of which did not bring any practical benefit, except for the development of LV technologies for the further production of Zeniths.
        As for the Shuttles, the shuttles did a great job. Without them, there would be no manned cosmonautics in Russia today, there would simply be nowhere to fly. If someone has a short memory, I will remind you: during the construction of the station, the Shuttles transported 312 tons of cargo, while the Russian launch vehicles delivered only 45,6 tons to the ISS.

        Items 1 and 2 are non-negotiable, this is an axiom !?
        P.3 312 tons and 45,6 tons - a jerk !? The difference is huge, but if Buran went into the series, after how many successful starts would the difference change signs?
        I have no desire to refute this nonsense. If the author (and you, apparently) considers the entire top leadership of the USSR to be fools, this is his own business. I take a different point of view. In yesterday's commentary on a similar topic, I presented it. All the top political and military leadership of the USSR, all the scientific elite of the Soviet Union, all recognized the fact of the US landing on the moon without the slightest doubt or hesitation. Why this dirt pops up again and again - I have already given the answer. Because you need to blurt out the topic of the failures of the Roscosmos strategy and divert the conversation aside. Will not work.
        At least with me.
        Finally, think about this. The landing of the Americans took place at the time of the maximum space confrontation between the two powers. At the time of the space race. Every Apollo launch in the USSR was closely watched. Both civilian and military. What do you think, if there was even the slightest chance to convict the Americans of lying, the Soviet leadership would not have done it? If only had a tiny clue?

        There is no need to refute anything about Roscosmos, it is enough: "Few people knew the Queen, but the whole World KNEW what He did, everyone knows Rogozin, but very few people know what He did!"
        Can you imagine the picture: the USSR in the 70s is carrying out explanatory work to prevent the emergence of "MMM" ??? Or refusal of "voucherization", etc. Just few people would understand what it was about!
        About - FALSE!
        Each of the National Projects is under close scrutiny! All projects are being implemented in accordance with the roadmap! After all, in a different way it can't be again (remember OJSC "MMM"). After all, everyone is talking about it !? We give birth, expand, receive, own, grow, break through, etc., etc. ???
        Or is it still going to fit the official, approved version !?
        From this to live, although not richer, and maybe not more fun, but calmer.

        By the way, at one time, in schools and universities
        At that time, they taught: "The earth is flat! If it were round, then people would fall"! This is for your points 1 and 2.
        I expressed only a subjective opinion.
        Ps I respect your attitude to the state of the space industry in Russia!
      2. bk0010
        bk0010 20 February 2021 23: 26
        +1
        Quote: Cosm22

        3. About failure - to the wrong address. The failure was with Buran, the only demonstration flight of which did not bring any practical benefit, except for the development of LV technologies for the further production of Zeniths.
        As for the Shuttles, the shuttles did a great job. Without them, there would be no manned cosmonautics in Russia today, there would simply be nowhere to fly. If someone has a short memory, I will remind you: during the construction of the station, the Shuttles transported 312 tons of cargo, while the Russian launch vehicles delivered only 45,6 tons to the ISS.
        After the decision was made to non-militarize space, the existence of Buran (maintaining the readiness of a group of attack satellites) lost its meaning. They did the right thing by not hammering nails with a microscope. The shuttle (created to service an orbital station for 50 people, but the military entered the project, because of whose requirements the ship became several times heavier) was supposed to reduce the cost of launching into orbit, instead lifted it to the limit, instead of 500 launches, 135 were made, out of 5 shuttles, 2 were killed. So the results with them are just not very good.
      3. ccsr
        ccsr 21 February 2021 10: 33
        0
        Quote: Cosm22
        Every Apollo launch in the USSR was closely watched. Both civilian and military. What do you think, if there was even the slightest chance to convict the Americans of lying, the Soviet leadership would not have done it?

        Lies, because we did not have the opportunity to receive television signals from the Moon, and what was received in Yevpatoria cannot even be identified.
        Quote: Cosm22
        1. Why repeat the already passed stage? Several landings have already been made on the Moon.

        Let the Americans answer you - they have been planning to land on the moon since the time of Bush the Younger, but for some reason they postpone the date every time.
        Quote: Cosm22
        The failure was with Buran, the only demonstration flight of which did not bring any practical benefit, except for the development of LV technologies for the further production of Zeniths.

        Lies, Buran is a technologically more complex product, and the Americans could not repeat the automatic landing on shuttles. Yes, and the shuttles died along with the crews - and this is a success?
        By the way, why was the shuttle program closed, since you are claiming its success?
        Quote: Cosm22
        I have no desire to refute this nonsense.

        Especially the one that concerned the inability of the United States to send astronauts to the ISS for many years. So why did they fly on our ships?
      4. victor50
        victor50 22 February 2021 13: 49
        0
        Quote: Cosm22
        Landing just to land?

        You're not right. There is a very serious motive for the landing - ccsr to prove that it was! laughing
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 21 February 2021 12: 42
      +1
      Quote: ccsr
      because all competent specialists

      In runetics.
      Quote: ccsr
      in more than fifty years they cannot repeat that

      It is quite possible that they will not be able to continue. The lunar program was made by two presidents in a row, Kennedy and Johnson, and they did not spare any money. Now the Americans are huddled with money, and each time they bury the programs of the previous administration.
      Quote: ccsr
      Yes, and a failure with the shuttle,

      The shuttle failure is 135 launches of an orbiter weighing 90+ tons (with cargo) in 2 accidents. Soyuz -2 (LV) of all types, for example, 115 launches with also 2 accidents (+3 partial)
      .
      Quote: ccsr
      lack of own orbital station

      Another country does not have its own orbital station. 85% of the ISS are American. This is despite the fact that the Americans have never paid special attention to DOS.
      Quote: ccsr
      best confirm the conclusions of the author of the article

      The author of the article collected a royal flush from conspiracy theories. If it was still interesting about the assassination of the American president by Jewish bankers - you rarely see a full-fledged Goebbelsism - then further on is ordinary illiteracy, which cannot be discussed. Just one clarification.
      What happened, however, was that the Soviet Union, which had suffered after the hardest war, was ahead of the rich and well-fed United States in rocketry.

      This, of course, is a lie. The United States lagged behind in flagstaffs due to the personal characteristics of President Eisenhower and his entourage. In particular, it was essential for them that the first space launch should be made not by SS von Braun on an army rocket, but by naval ones on a special non-military a rocket that weighed 10 tons against 270 tons of seven. The avant-garde was assembled from the components of scientific geophysical rockets.

      Naturally, as soon as von Braun was allowed to launch an army Jupiter weighing 29 tons (against, let me remind, the Soviet 270), the satellite was successfully launched. The Sturmbannführer launched (suborbital) rockets into space while Hitler was still alive, and could have entered orbit 5, or even 10 years earlier, if the Americans had any interest in this venture.

      As for the situation at the beginning of the 60s, it was as follows.
      It must be admitted that now we are leading only formally, but in essence we are already behind: 120 satellite launches in America and 20 - with us. The USA is constantly preparing and testing more and more new equipment, is continuously receiving a powerful stream of information from space, and we are only "pulsating" so far; the breaks between flights are too long. The fact that we are behind the United States in space, the world will be able to see in 1963, but it is almost impossible to convince our leaders of this.

      In numbers, it looks like this:
      1957 - USSR 2 successful launches (2 total) - USA 0 successes (1 total launch)
      1958 - 2 (5) - 7 (23!)
      1959 - 3 (4) - 10 (19). Among the American 10 - 5 spy satellites of the "corona" series, the USSR will start launching its much inferior analogue (Zenith - Kosmos-4) only in April 62.
      1960 - 3 (9) - 16 (29)
      1961 - 5 (9) - 29 (41)

      It should be remembered that the statistics on unsuccessful Soviet launches are not really known. But if we rely on the open figures given above, the United States did not just outstrip the USSR, but dominated space since the late 50s. The lag - catastrophic - was only in PR, which is just an incredible bastard for the Americans.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 21 February 2021 12: 53
        +3
        Orbital launches, USSR / USA, 1957

        1958

        Leadership, hmm.
        1. Charik
          Charik 22 February 2021 21: 59
          -2
          flag of a Jew, il, what is it, I don’t understand
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 22 February 2021 22: 36
            0
            Quote: Charik
            what is it, I don't understand

            It happens.
      2. ccsr
        ccsr 21 February 2021 13: 19
        -2
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        It is quite possible that they will not be able to continue. The lunar program was made by two presidents in a row, Kennedy and Johnson, and they did not spare any money.

        The excuse will not work - even now the Americans declare their claims to the moon, which means they need flights.
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        The shuttle failure is 135 launches of an orbiter weighing 90+ tons (with cargo) in 2 accidents.

        And why, then, the “successful” program was closed and no longer returned to it?
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        Another country does not have its own orbital station. 85% of the ISS are American.

        The lies are primitive - there are 85% of our technologies and our solutions, and there is not even an American toilet there.
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        The author of the article collected a royal flush from conspiracy theories.

        I am not discussing the entire article, I am interested in the part concerning the lunar falsification.
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        As for the situation at the beginning of the 60s, it was as follows.

        And nothing that Kamanin himself did not believe in the possibility of an American landing?
        Quote: Cherry Nine
        But if we rely on the open figures given above, the United States did not just outstrip the USSR, but dominated space since the late 50s.

        Did you come up with it yourself or refer to the source? Your slogans do not interest me, especially since no one has yet proven that the foot of an American astronaut touched the surface of the moon. Your belief in this event does not really impress me, especially since the first satellite and the first cosmonaut were Soviet. And American suborbital space flights are not at all what we did, but you are silent about this in the general calculation.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 21 February 2021 14: 17
          0
          Quote: ccsr
          even now the Americans are making their claims on the moon

          The Americans do not "make claims to the moon" but declare all deep space to be American jurisdiction. This is an obvious decision to shape the rules of the game for non-state space companies. It has its pluses and minuses (there are obviously more pluses), but in any case the RF does not concern - the RF is not in deep space. Sooner or later, the Americans will reach an agreement with Europe, Japan, China and India and the issue of jurisdiction will be closed.
          Quote: ccsr
          And why then the "successful" program was closed

          Because it turned out to be conceptually flawed - the payload was only a quarter of the mass that was dragged into orbit, plus the rate of 100% manned missions was a tragic mistake. The returned second stage does not pay off these inconveniences. The idea of ​​returning the first stage turned out to be much more successful.
          Quote: ccsr
          there are 85% of our technologies and our solutions, and there is not even an American toilet there.

          "Your" space toilet "is an internet meme. The lag of Roskosmos in life support systems is completely hopeless.
          Quote: ccsr
          And nothing that Kamanin himself did not believe in the possibility of an American landing?

          Seriously? Didn't you believe it until the 69th year?
          On November 9 and 10, the Americans won two major new victories in space: the first launch of the Saturn-5 rocket with the Apollo spacecraft and the soft landing on the moon of the Surveyor-6 spacecraft. A particularly impressive event is the launch of Saturn-5, which launched a cargo weighing 140 tons into the near-earth orbit (the total weight of the third stage of the Apollo rocket and the spacecraft). This is seven times the weight lifted into space by our UR-500K rocket, and 50-60 tons more than the cargo that should be lifted next year by our most powerful N-1 carrier.

          The flight of Saturn 5 put an end to our superiority to the United States in missile power. Now America has every opportunity to be a leading space power. Only major failures in mastering the operation of Saturn 5 and Apollo (which is unlikely) could delay America's victorious march in space and equalize our chances of superiority in flying to the moon. We must directly admit that now the Americans have every reason to hope that they will be the first to land on the moon and other planets. We have lost the leading role in space research and in the coming years we will witness our further lag. For 7–8 years, the Soviet Union was a leading space power, two or three years ago the United States came close to us and began to overtake us in some ways (in particular, on manned flights), and now they have surged ahead. The main reasons for our failures are well known:

          1. Poor organization of work (Ustinov, Smirnov, Pashkov, Malinovsky, Grechko).

          2. Errors of the chief designers (Korolev, Mishin) when creating the Soyuz spacecraft and N-1 carrier, as well as their lack of discipline in the execution of government decisions.

          3. Insufficient coordination of efforts of various design bureaus, departments and institutes with limited funds allocated for space research (the United States spends several times more money on space exploration than the USSR).

          Quote: ccsr
          Did you come up with it yourself or refer to the source?

          Well, if you didn't work out with numbers within 100 in elementary school, then I can no longer help here. Moreover, it is directly stated that the figures are given only for orbital flights.
          1. ccsr
            ccsr 21 February 2021 14: 54
            +1
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            Because it turned out to be conceptually flawed - the payload was only a quarter of the mass that was dragged into orbit, plus the rate of 100% manned missions was a tragic mistake. The returned second stage does not pay off these inconveniences.

            Those. The chatter about the superiority of American technology was dispelled - only fools do not calculate all this in advance. Well, at least it was admitted, i.e. the failure of American scientific thought is evident.
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            The lag of Roskosmos in life support systems is completely hopeless.

            Your primitive lies are refuted by the Americans themselves:
            The toilet on the American segment of the International Space Station does not work again, astronauts use a similar device on the Russian segment

            Quote: Cherry Nine
            Seriously? Didn't you believe it until the 69th year?

            And he himself participated in the creation of Saturns-5 or was admitted to the workshop for their assembly and technical documentation? All the information that he had was either from the media, or what our special services were able to obtain, and this is too little to understand at what level the development is.
            Quote: Cherry Nine
            then I can no longer help here.

            In general, you cannot help me with anything in this topic - your home-grown conclusions are too primitive, and do not correspond to what I know about this program.
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 21 February 2021 15: 17
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              Those. the chatter about the superiority of American technology was dispelled

              That is, mistakes in the formulation of technical specifications lead to unjustified solutions, regardless of their technical perfection.
              Quote: ccsr
              only fools don't calculate all this in advance

              Well, don't you know.
              Quote: ccsr
              Your primitive lies are refuted by the Americans themselves:

              Mine?
              - I was surprised to read on the Roscosmos website that we are the leaders in space life support systems. I don’t understand from what advisors and consultants this information appeared, but in reality, it is in the life support systems that we have the greatest failure and lag.

              https://www.trud.ru/article/14-06-2018/1363481_na_mne_postavili_krest_posle_pjatogo_poleta.html
              Another Hero of Russia sold out for chewing gum, apparently.
              Quote: ccsr
              and this is too little to understand at what level the development is.

              How interesting.
              On Saturday, December 10, I was at the Department of Defense to watch the movie Apollo. Present: Grechko, Zakharov, Shtemenko, Ivashutin, Vershinin, Rudenko and a dozen other generals. The film was prepared by the GRU (Main Intelligence Directorate - Ed.) Of the General Staff and our Institute of Aviation and Space Medicine and gives a complete picture of the grandiose work of the United States in space. Particularly impressive are the footage of the Saturn-1 and Saturn-5 rockets and the Gemini and Apollo ships. The Saturn rocket is assembled in a vertical position (the height of the assembly body is 160 meters) and in this position is taken out to the start. Attention is drawn to the particular thoroughness and planned preparation of missiles and ships for launch, the enormous volume of tests and the availability of a large arsenal of simulators for training astronauts. People who know the difficulties of fulfilling our space program, after watching this film, can get a clearer idea of ​​our lag behind the United States and the illusory hopes of restoring the USSR's leadership in space exploration.

              Where is he up to you.
              Quote: ccsr
              There is nothing you can do to help me on this topic.

              You? I can not. And I don’t want to, to be honest.
              1. ccsr
                ccsr 21 February 2021 15: 46
                -1
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                That is, mistakes in the formulation of technical specifications lead to unjustified solutions, regardless of their technical perfection.

                These mistakes speak of the culture of space technology design.
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                Another Hero of Russia sold out for chewing gum, apparently.

                You started juggling here too, because Padalko generally notes our advantages of the technologies of the 80s, which were in demand even with him. And the regeneration of water and carbon dioxide, in my opinion, is not worth considering this as our serious lag, because the cheapness of flights of our cargo ships allows us to abandon these systems, which reduces the weight of the station itself. So we need to take everything into account in a complex, and not snatch phrases from the article.
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                The film was prepared by the GRU (Main Intelligence Directorate - Ed.) Of the General Staff and our Institute of Aviation and Space Medicine and gives a complete picture of the grandiose work of the United States in space. Particularly impressive are the footage of the Saturn-1 and Saturn-5 rockets and the Gemini and Apollo ships.

                The film was shot based on media materials, because if our agent could illegally shoot the assembly and technical documentation, then no one would see such a film at all, except for a few people in the country at the level of Brezhnev, Ustinov and Grechko. It’s easy to cheat you with such texts, which is why I’m not surprised by the nonsense that the supporters of landing on the moon carry, listening to the Americans with their mouths open.
                Quote: Cherry Nine
                You? I can not. And I don’t want to, to be honest.

                You can't, to be completely honest - you haven't gained such knowledge yet ...
        2. The eye of the crying
          The eye of the crying 23 February 2021 09: 33
          +1
          Quote: ccsr

          The excuse will not work - even now the Americans declare their claims to the moon, which means they need flights.


          They would be needed if anyone other than the Americans flew there.
  • zenion
    zenion 20 February 2021 21: 44
    0
    So is the Earth flat, or plate-shaped?
  • Lannan Shi
    Lannan Shi 20 February 2021 13: 49
    +10
    Quote: lucul
    Oppas have already forgotten how to refute - they now have absolutely everything that contradicts their point of view)))

    Well, prove that you can.
    Here's a statement. Russia is now unable to produce the T-26, despite the technological advantage over the USSR 30x. So the T-26 did not exist. And all references to him, photos, etc. - a grandiose hoax. We don't have such engines, we don't have such armor, which means that the T-26 is basically impossible. And even if we create complete production chains, it will not be the T-26, but a fake for it. With the wrong engine, the wrong materials, and the wrong gasoline.
    And the main thing. Take a look at this photo.

    This is a clear falsification. If you study the design of the hypothetical T-26, then every reasonable person will understand that with such ergonomics, even after a short march, tankers should not even stand on their feet, but they, in the photo, are smiling! The technique is clearly borrowed from the then Hollywood.
    Well, here's a classic drawing of an owl on a globe. Now refute. Arguably. Better yet, start mass production of fully authentic T-26s to prove they are not fiction. yes
    PS
    I'm not going to discuss the American moon landing. There are many arguments for and against. But it is the arguments, not owls and globes.
    1. lucul
      lucul 20 February 2021 15: 27
      -10%
      Well, prove that you can.
      Here's a statement. Russia is now unable to produce the T-26, despite the technological advantage over the USSR 30x. So the T-26 did not exist. And all references to him, photos, etc. - a grandiose hoax.

      In vain you are trying to show off your feminine logic.
      Replicas of the I-16, just like the replica of the MiG-3, have recently been successfully made and tested by those who were interested. If anyone is interested, he will make a replica of the T-26 without any problems.
      And so, I see, in topics about amers, it's always just a bunch of communists, foaming at the mouth, supporting their employer)))
    2. ccsr
      ccsr 20 February 2021 17: 25
      +3
      Quote: Lannan Shi
      Russia is now unable to produce the T-26, despite the technological advantage over the USSR 30x. So the T-26 did not exist.

      Cheap rigging - the modern T-90 is structurally and technologically more complicated by several orders of magnitude than the T-26, and this already proves that the technical process in the USSR went on continuously, right up to the present day. Moreover, any large machine-building plant according to the T-26 drawings will calmly reproduce it, only there is no sense in this, because now we need another tank for the troops.
      But Saturn-5 still the Americans cannot repeat, let alone create something much more complicated. So the weak "analyst" among you, and no engineer at all. However, you clearly do not have engineering knowledge, a typical humanist, which is why it is not even interesting to discuss with you the questions that the author of the article raises.
      1. Simargl
        Simargl 20 February 2021 19: 14
        +6
        Quote: ccsr
        Moreover, any large machine-building plant according to the T-26 drawings will calmly reproduce it, only there is no sense in this, because now another tank is needed for the troops.
        They won't. Many technological operations are now forgotten as unnecessary.
        Only riveting will be brought to mind for two years, so that it looks similar, and not better and more technologically advanced.
        In the same F-1, more than one kilometer of a weld seam was manually sprinkled by welders of unique qualifications (now there are some, but also few).
        Quote: ccsr
        But Saturn-5 still the Americans cannot repeat, let alone create something much more complicated.
        The same Shuttle was an order of magnitude more complicated, many watched launches and even accidents almost live. Or is he a fake too? And tell me, for what purpose do you need a rocket 2 times more expensive than the Shuttle?
        Quote: ccsr
        So the weak "analyst" among you, and no engineer at all.
        It just so happened that the "engineers" who are trying to prove the impossibility of flying to the moon of sworn friends, in fact, out of the blue is any unscientific delirium. The analyzes of flights are in the public domain, but the conspiracy theorists (I will receive a warning for this word again) do not care about the arguments of the specialists - the main thing is for them believe!
        1. ccsr
          ccsr 20 February 2021 19: 29
          -4
          Quote: Simargl
          They won't. Many technological operations are now forgotten as unnecessary.

          Yes, now they will model any technological process faster and reproduce it even better. It's just costly, and unpromising, that's why no one would ever think to repeat it - only a change of equipment will result in a pretty penny.
          Quote: Simargl
          In the same F-1, more than one kilometer of the weld seam, which was manually sprinkled by welders of unique qualifications

          With the current control systems and precision of machine welding by robots, it will be even cheaper.
          Quote: Simargl
          The same Shuttle was an order of magnitude more complicated, many watched launches and even accidents almost live. Or is he a fake too?

          The shuttles did not have engines from Saturn-5 - no need to be sidetracked from the problems of the Americans in the 60s, especially since two shuttles crashed.
          Quote: Simargl
          And tell me, for what task do you need a rocket 2 times more expensive than the Shuttle?

          And what shuttles are suitable for flights to the moon? Who is eager to go there now - haven't you heard the promises to the American in 2020 to land on the moon, this is what Bush Jr. promised? And now they are scaring us with this landing, only it is not clear what they will fly there.
          Quote: Simargl
          Analysis of flights in the public domain,

          This is how the humanities are dismantled, in the main, and it is the engineers who are hounded, who begin to doubt when they read American sources. You can personally explain why the reformatted television signal from the Moon was first displayed on the screen, and all the television companies in the world were filming this particular screen on their television cameras. And they did not launch a direct signal on TV, but what was shown to them on the screen. Nobody has ever done this and is not doing it until now. Can you explain?
          1. Simargl
            Simargl 20 February 2021 20: 20
            -2
            Quote: ccsr
            Yes, now they will model any technological process faster and reproduce it even better.
            Rather, they will be replaced with a more technological one. And it so happens that if the T-26 made now is moved in those days, it will still be a wunderwaffe.

            Quote: ccsr
            With the current control systems and precision of machine welding by robots, it will be even cheaper.
            The problem is that the design is also adjusted to the production, and it turned out to be not a trivial task to weld such an engine with a machine. Yes, they dismantled TNA for digitization, scratched their turnips and passed a verdict: nafig is not needed - now children are doing better.

            Quote: ccsr
            The shuttles did not have engines from Saturn-5 - no need to be sidetracked from the problems of the Americans in the 60s, especially since two shuttles crashed.
            There was not, but there was only one disaster due to the engine. But it is only because of the thoroughness of the checks and the reusability of the TTU. The second disaster is purely organizational. They could also solve the problem: there were means and opportunities.

            Quote: ccsr
            And what shuttles are suitable for flights to the moon?
            Shuttles are not. SLS is possible. But to redesign the Shuttle for a two-launch scheme would be, I think, possible.
            Quote: ccsr
            Haven't you heard the promises that an American will land on the moon in 2020, is that what Bush Jr. promised?
            So every Japanese prime minister promises to return the "northern territories". Then it happened: the globe is over, there is no one else to rob.
            But hopes were raised: an asteroid worth 30 annual budgets of the planet. I think someone's already itching.
            Quote: ccsr
            And even now they frighten us with this landing, only it is not clear what they will fly there.
            Until the prospect of development dawns (this is when the action is economically profitable) - no one will particularly rush there. I think as soon as ITER starts working normally ... or another fusion reactor.

            Quote: ccsr
            This is how the humanities mostly disassemble
            No need to listen to the humanities. Listen to Leonov ... okay, don't need Leonov - in the opinion of the followers of the sect, he is not engaged (although everyone who claims that there were flights - you can write down there) ... listen to Surdin, read Pervushin - they are engineers.
            Quote: ccsr
            You can personally explain why the reformatted television signal from the Moon was first displayed on the screen, and all the television companies in the world were filming this particular screen on their television cameras.
            As soon as you explain how to change the video signal format on the fly (Apollo video camera - 325 lines, 10 fps) - I will immediately assume that there were no flights.
            Want some tasty treat?
            1. ccsr
              ccsr 21 February 2021 10: 52
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              No need to listen to the humanities. Listen to Leonov ... okay, you don't need Leonov - in the opinion of the followers of the sect, he is not engaged (although everyone who claims that there were flights can be written there) ...

              Do you think that Formula 1 pilots are better at understanding the intricacies of creating car engines than designers, just on the basis that they turn the steering wheel more during competition? Leonov, after his statement that we allegedly saw a live broadcast of the landing from the Moon, immediately showed his level of professional understanding of the problems of television reception of signals from the Moon. No one in the world could receive an American television signal from the moon - can you understand that?
              Quote: Simargl
              As soon as you explain how to change the video signal format on the fly (Apollo video camera - 325 lines, 10 fps) - I will immediately assume that there were no flights.
              Want some tasty treat?

              Do you even know what signal came from the moon and what was received in Houston?
              "Cosmonautics News":
              "... The lunar module of the Apollo 11 spacecraft had a small-frame television system SSTV, which transmitted a black-and-white" picture "on 320 lines at a frequency of 10 frames per second through the allocated frequency band of only 0.5 MHz. ALSC camera delivered in the module compartment equipment, was activated by Armstrong before descending the stairs from the lunar module hatch to the lunar surface.
              The video signal from the camera, combined with audio signal, biomedical data of astronauts and telemetry, was transmitted in S-band from an antenna on the lunar module to two NASA receiving stations - Goldstone in California (Goldstone, 64-meter antenna) and Honisuckle Creek near Canberra in Australia (Honeysuckle Creek, 26-meter antenna) - and to the Australian Parks radio telescope (Parkes; 64-meter antenna). The received signal was recorded at each station on a 14-track 1 inch wide magnetic tape; one reel held about 15 minutes of recording.
              To broadcast the video signal, it was required to extract and convert it to the American television standard NTSC (525 lines, 30 frames per second). To do this, a specially developed optical converter was used, which was based on a vidicon camera that shoots the SSTV screen with the required frequency, and a device for recording and replaying the current frame. The Australian NTSC TV signal was transmitted over microwave links through the communications center in Sydney to the Moree ground station, from there to the Intelsat 3 F4 satellite, from there to the Jamesburg ground station in California and over the land line to Houston. The signal from Goldstone also came there. It is interesting to add that Houston broadcast the "picture" with a delay of 6 seconds - in order to have time to interrupt the report if something terrible happens on the Moon.
              Almost all of Armstrong and Aldrin's output was broadcast from the "picture" received at Parkes. However, in the first few minutes, the moon's height above the horizon was insufficient for good reception, and images from Goldstone and Honisuckle Creek were mixed on the air. It was this small Australian station that was on the air when Neil Armstrong stepped onto the lunar surface. "

              Can you explain why the Australian video signal did not go directly to the TV network, since it was already automatically reformatted to NTSC?
              And one more question - in the work of Moorhead "Telemetry", it is indicated that it was impossible to simultaneously transmit telemetry, speech and video signal. How will you refute this if the work came out just before the flight to the moon?
              1. Simargl
                Simargl 21 February 2021 12: 25
                -1
                Quote: ccsr
                Do you think that Formula 1 pilots are better at understanding the intricacies of creating car engines than designers, just on the basis that they turn the steering wheel more during competition?

                In any case, a pilot understands his car better than any layman. he is a team member who directly influences the development of his car. So clear? The main part of the cosmonaut training program is the study of the structure of the spacecraft, if anything.

                Quote: ccsr
                Do you even know what signal came from the moon and what was received in Houston?
                In outline. I can even imagine that it is not very difficult to decode it. no encryption was there. It was even possible to adapt, without any special alterations, an ordinary TV. True, one would have to be smart with the scan so that the image would not be a strip stretched in width.

                Quote: ccsr
                SSTV, which transmitted a black-and-white "picture" of 320 lines at a frequency of 10 frames per second through a dedicated frequency band of only 0.5 MHz.
                SSTV - Slow-scan television. This crap isn't a top-secret NASA project - it's still in use today. True, the frame rate is even lower. But so does the bandwidth.

                Quote: ccsr
                The video signal from the camera, combined with audio signal, biomedical data of astronauts and telemetry, was transmitted in S-band from an antenna on the lunar module to two NASA receiving stations
                To signal passed on only at two stations - a plate with FAST would have to be put on the moon, and even to correct the beam constantly, and so - broadcast towards the globe. And here formal reception those designated stations were conducted ... and those who could do it technically ... for example, the USSR.

                Quote: ccsr
                To do this, a specially developed optical converter was used, which was based on a vidicon camera that shoots the SSTV screen with the required frequency, and a device for recording and replaying the current frame.
                You, as I understand it, are not boom-boom in physics? Probably not even seen an oscilloscope with a CRT? So: the SSTV image is about the quality of an oscilloscope with a CRT. And the frequency difference of 10:30 will give a wild flicker of the picture, for this they came up with the idea of ​​repeating the frame (3 times).

                Quote: ccsr
                Can you explain why the Australian video signal did not go directly to the TV network, since it was already automatically reformatted to NTSC?
                I did not understand the question: VHF does not penetrate the horizon, because when the Moon was from Australia, the signal was broadcast via satellite to Houston.

                Quote: ccsr
                And one more question - in the work of Moorhead "Telemetry", it is indicated that it was impossible to simultaneously transmit telemetry, speech and video signal.
                Something I don't understand: what is it about? So, for general development: today, radio stations add a bunch of all kinds of good things to their signal: from stereo to text. The issue is not the transmission, but the ability of the receiver to decode. Buy is not the easiest one and see.
                What's the problem with transmitting video, audio and telemetry? You can cram a lot into 500 kHz. The bandwidth is also small for the antenna to have a higher Q factor and smaller dimensions.
                This is how adherents of non-glamor and Van Allen remember ...
                1. ccsr
                  ccsr 21 February 2021 13: 03
                  +2
                  Quote: Simargl
                  The main part of the cosmonaut training program is the study of the structure of the spacecraft, if anything.

                  He learns how to operate a ship, not how components are technologically created and how they are produced. Have you personally encountered astronauts to understand their level of understanding of the problems with the same TV broadcast from the Moon?
                  Quote: Simargl
                  It was even possible to adapt, without any special alterations, an ordinary TV.

                  So you immediately realized that cheating with a lunar camera was provided for future excuses.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  and those who could technically ... for example, the USSR.

                  At that time we did not have equipment for receiving broadband television signals at these frequencies; we could only receive narrowband signals - speech and telemetry. Then, when such equipment was created and used in Evpatoria, they still did not receive a nifig so that we could make sure that they were broadcasting from the moon. So, something was fixed, but the picture was so vague that it was impossible to understand anything. I'm not even talking about the rest of the world - no one at all had such equipment, and the Americans brought their equipment to Australia.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  You, as I understand it, are not boom-boom in physics?

                  Until I understood, you cannot answer a single question posed, and moreover, you even had no idea how the broadcast from the moon went. Will you continue to be clever, or do you still write something sane?
                  Quote: Simargl
                  I did not understand the question: VHF does not penetrate the horizon, because when the Moon was from Australia, the signal was broadcast via satellite to Houston.

                  You did not understand it because the Americans in Houston displayed this signal on their screen, and only then from this screen all other television networks filmed it in their formats. This is how they "erase the prints", in particular the interference ones, by which one can understand what kind of image was going on in the television networks.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Something I don't understand: what is it about? So, for general development: today, radio stations add a bunch of all kinds of good things to their signal: from stereo to text.

                  Do you have any idea how the analog signals of that time differ from modern digital ones?
                  Quote: Simargl
                  What's the problem with transmitting video, audio and telemetry? You can cram a lot into 500 kHz. The bandwidth is also small for the antenna to have a higher Q factor and smaller dimensions.
                  This is how adherents of non-glamor and Van Allen remember ...

                  And the problem is that you are simply not in the subject:
                  Lunar cockpit hardware
                  The equipment of the lunar cockpit is almost the same as that of the crew compartment. Therefore, we will consider only the main elements of the difference between both blocks.... The LK transmitter can work with both FM signals and FM signals. However, both types of signals cannot be transmitted simultaneously. The FM transmission mode is needed only in those cases when there is a television report from the surface of the Moon. The lunar cabin does not have the ability to transmit data from tape recorders and memory devices directly to Earth at an accelerated rate. All transmission modes are carried out at a frequency of 2282,5 MHz. Instead of TWTs used in the power amplifiers of the OE unit, the LK unit uses amplitrons, which provide a transmitter output power of 20 watts.
                  Now, explain how they could display a television picture and simultaneously listen to the speech of an astronaut, if this was not technically possible in the Apollo's multifunctional communication system?
                2. Simargl
                  Simargl 21 February 2021 13: 57
                  0
                  Quote: ccsr
                  He learns how to operate a ship, not how components are technologically created and how they are produced.
                  Don't just steer the ship, but
                  Quote: Simargl
                  The main part of the cosmonaut training program is ship design study
                  Read carefully!

                  Quote: ccsr
                  So you immediately realized that cheating with a lunar camera was provided for future excuses.
                  Why such a stupid conclusion? Do you suggest that everyone remodel their TVs for the duration of the broadcast, and then back? They did it easier: they recorded it on tape (by the way, if you don't know, those cassettes that were used in everyday life with inclined-line recording, and those on which the Apollo broadcast was recorded - straight-stitched, i.e., tracks along the tape, like in ordinary audio tape recorders. .. only on audio tape 4 tracks, but here 12), played on a special TV, and filmed from it with a TV camera. It's all simple now, but then you had to dodge.
                  It is not my fault that due to your youth and / or lack of knowledge, you cannot get into the shoes of those engineers.

                  Quote: ccsr
                  Until I understood, you cannot answer a single question posed, and moreover, you even had no idea how the broadcast from the moon went.
                  A pointed antenna (is that understandable?) With a high Q factor (small frequency range, high energy density). This does not mean that the signal was directed strictly to some small speck on Earth - the signal level was approximately the same throughout the planet.

                  Quote: ccsr
                  Will you continue to be clever, or do you still write something sane?
                  You first ask how it works - then laugh. I know how it works.

                  Quote: ccsr
                  Do you have any idea how the analog signals of that time differ from modern digital ones?
                  I know how the analog signal (on the air) differs from the digital one: NOTHING !!!

                  Quote: ccsr
                  And the problem is that you are simply not in the subject.
                  The problem is that I'm ... in the subject !!!

                  Quote: ccsr
                  The LC transmitter can work with both FM signals and FM signals. However, both types of signals cannot be transmitted simultaneously. The FM broadcast mode is needed only in those cases when there is a television report from the lunar surface.
                  Here the problem arises: Do you know how the TV signal works? And what is the difference between FM and World Cup? And what, audio cannot be transmitted through the FM? A number?
                  Yeah ... game ...

                3. ccsr
                  ccsr 21 February 2021 14: 43
                  +1
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Read carefully!

                  Do you at least understand how a constructor differs from an operator before advising me to read something carefully? You are just a dense person, which is why you think that any chauffeur who has studied his car in the framework of a technical description can drive a car and create it.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Why such a stupid conclusion?

                  This conclusion was not made by me, but by American experts, who initially suggested using a completely different standard for this epoch-making event.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  A pointed antenna (is that understandable?) With a high Q factor (small frequency range, high energy density). This does not mean that the signal was directed strictly to some small speck on Earth - the signal level was approximately the same throughout the planet.

                  Even on one that was out of the line of sight of the moon? By the way, the attenuation level of this signal at a distance of 400 thousand km with a transmitter power of 12-14 W can be at least roughly reported in order to understand that other conditions are needed in this radio link, including a large-diameter parabolic antenna and cryogenic equipment for amplifiers. And at any point it was all? Well, well, you are still that dreamer ...
                  Quote: Simargl
                  The problem is that I'm ... in the subject !!!

                  Have you worked with space technology? I wonder where, educate, to understand how much you are in the topic of the level of those developments.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Do you know how a TV signal works?

                  Read Moorehead's work "Telemetry" for a start before you tell me stories, because he explains there that the influence of the speech signal on telemetry is already creating problems for accurate reproduction, and this has not been eliminated. When you understand what he is writing about, then tell us if it affected the television signal during the broadcast. Here's what actually happened:
                  Ground tests of the combined multifunctional system identified a number of problems associated with the selected signal structure. From the point of view of designing communication systems for future space flights, it is necessary to dwell on these problems in more detail.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Yeah ... game ...

                  It's more about you - you don't even know the elementary problems of this radio link, but you have already decided that you are a big specialist in everything.
                4. Simargl
                  Simargl 21 February 2021 15: 00
                  -1
                  Quote: ccsr
                  You are just a dense person, which is why you think that any chauffeur who has studied his car in the framework of a technical description can drive a car and create it.
                  Yes, quite dense. Once upon a time, in order to obtain the right to drive a car, it was necessary to study not only traffic rules, but also the device of the car. This does not mean that any driver could develop a car, but they understood its design and structure. Many people call an ambulance to change a wheel ...

                  Quote: ccsr
                  This conclusion was not made by me, but by American experts, who initially suggested using a completely different standard for this epoch-making event.
                  When did they say that? It is written in black for you on paper: it was required to translate 320 lines, 10 frames per second, into 525 lines, 30 frames per second, to do it "head-on", using purely electronic components, if possible, it is very expensive. You have little idea of ​​the possibilities of electronics in those years!
                  Now you can drum from format to format in real time, but then ...

                  Quote: ccsr
                  And at any point it was all?
                  I do not understand what you want! On the entire surface of the planet, there was approximately the same signal level - accept it if you can.

                  Quote: ccsr
                  Have you worked with space technology?
                  With electronics ... What does space have to do with it? It's even easier there, except for cooling.

                  Quote: ccsr
                  I wonder where, educate, to understand how much you are in the topic of the level of those developments.
                  What kind of "those"? Take the magazine "Radio" for the end of the 70s and roughly imagine what the Astronauts were dealing with ...

                  Quote: ccsr
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Read carefully!

                  Do you at least understand how a constructor differs from an operator before advising me to read something carefully? You are just a dense person, which is why you think that any chauffeur who has studied his car in the framework of a technical description can drive a car and create it.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Why such a stupid conclusion?

                  This conclusion was not made by me, but by American experts, who initially suggested using a completely different standard for this epoch-making event.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  A pointed antenna (is that understandable?) With a high Q factor (small frequency range, high energy density). This does not mean that the signal was directed strictly to some small speck on Earth - the signal level was approximately the same throughout the planet.

                  Even on one that was out of the line of sight of the moon? By the way, the attenuation level of this signal at a distance of 400 thousand km with a transmitter power of 12-14 W can be at least roughly reported in order to understand that other conditions are needed in this radio link, including a large-diameter parabolic antenna and cryogenic equipment for amplifiers. And at any point it was all? Well, well, you are still that dreamer ...
                  Quote: Simargl
                  The problem is that I'm ... in the subject !!!

                  Have you worked with space technology? I wonder where, educate, to understand how much you are in the topic of the level of those developments.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Do you know how a TV signal works?

                  Read Moorehead's work "Telemetry" for a start before you tell me stories, because he explains there that the influence of the speech signal on telemetry is already creating problems for accurate reproduction, and this has not been eliminated. When you understand what he is writing about, then tell us if it affected the television signal during the broadcast. Here's what actually happened:
                  Ground tests of the combined multifunctional system identified a number of problems associated with the selected signal structure. From the point of view of designing communication systems for future space flights, it is necessary to dwell on these problems in more detail.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Yeah ... game ...

                  It's more about you - you don't even know the elementary problems of this radio link, but you have already decided that you are a big specialist in everything.
                  I don’t see any links.

                  Quote: ccsr
                  It's more about you - you don't even know the elementary problems of this radio link, but you have already decided that you are a big specialist in everything.
                  These are not radio link problems as far as I understand. And the problem is not insoluble.
                5. ccsr
                  ccsr 21 February 2021 15: 29
                  +2
                  Quote: Simargl
                  Take the magazine "Radio" for the end of the 70s and roughly imagine what the Astronauts were dealing with ...

                  I do not need to read these magazines, because at that time I took part in the flight design tests of the Almazov, including the reception of optoelectronic images. So I know the problems not from the magazines, but from the test results.
                  Quote: Simargl
                  These are not radio link problems as far as I understand.

                  No, it is precisely the serious problems that the Americans point out, which they only intended to eliminate:
                  It is planned to carry out a number of changes in the system, allowing to increase the energy potential of the radio link in certain operating modes. The characteristics of the Apollo spacecraft's multifunctional communication system will be significantly improved by the time of the first launches of manned objects.

                  As always, only promises, and the astronauts were sent on the flight without even testing the entire system on real routes - nifiga "experimenters", our designers of that era were simply amazed who were in the subject.
                6. Simargl
                  Simargl 21 February 2021 18: 19
                  -3
                  Quote: ccsr
                  No, it is precisely the serious problems that the Americans point out, which they only intended to eliminate:
                  So where are the links then?
                  And it turns out that another offended, dismissed non-specialist will write garbage, it will become outdated, and then it turns out that everything is solved, the problem has been worked out and everything has been working for a long time.

                  Quote: ccsr
                  As always, some promises, and the astronauts were sent on the flight without even testing the entire system on real routes
                  So where are the links to the text?
                7. ccsr
                  ccsr 21 February 2021 20: 43
                  +1
                  Quote: Simargl
                  So where are the links then?

                  TELEMETRY IN ROCKET AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY
                  MULTIFUNCTIONAL SYSTEM OF COMMUNICATION WITH SPACE SHIP "APOLLON"
                  R.V. Moorhead, J.D. Arndt 1)

                  Study the list of "offended"
                  REFERENCES
                  1. Levine S., et al., A Study of the JPL Mark I Ranging Subsystem, Goddard Space Flight Center, X-531-65-467, 1965.
                  2. Baumert L., Easterling M., Golomb SW, Viterbi A., Coding Theory and Its Applications to Communications Systems, Tech. Report No. 32-67 (NASw-6), Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., March 1961.
                  3. Hill JD, Design Philosophy of Modulation Indices for Apollo Unified S-Band Modes with Ranging — Case 215, Rep. TM 65-2021-3, Bellcomm, Inc., March 11, 1965.
                  4. Carden FF, Osborne W., Davis G., Advanced Study of Video Signal Processing in Low Signal to Noise Environments, NASA Research Grant NGR-32-003-037, December 1967.
                  5. Proceedings of the Apolo Unified S-Band Technical Conference, NASA SP-37, July 1965.
                  6. Block II CSM Manned Space Flight Network Signal Performance and Inter¬face Specification, North American Rockwell Corp., SID 64-1613, August 15, 1966.
                  7. LM-MSFN S-Band System Signal Performance and Interface Specification, Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation, LSP-380-17, June 1965.
                  8. Dawson ST., Arndt GD, Moorehead RW, A Perfor¬mance Analysis of the Apollo Unified S-Band Communications System for a Typical Lunar Mission, MSC Internal Note MSC-EB-R-67-1, May 1967

                  Can you find it yourself if you decide to dig deep?
                8. Cherry Nine
                  Cherry Nine 21 February 2021 22: 06
                  -1
                  Quote: ccsr
                  Study the list of "offended"

                  A list of people who, 2-4 years before Apollo 8, wrote that the design of the communication system at the beginning of 67 was not final? Yes, they have saluted so.
                9. ccsr
                  ccsr 22 February 2021 11: 22
                  0
                  Quote: Cherry Nine
                  Yes, they have saluted so.

                  The author of the publication uses printed materials that came out in May 1967, and his work itself was written later. Do you think that in a year the Americans could completely redesign the multifunctional communication system, conduct tests and achieve better performance - well, well ...
                  By the way, the initial calculations of the Americans showed that they would cost 26 meter parabolic antennas:
                  The 26-meter antennas provide communications and trajectory measurements during the Apollo mission in circumlunar orbit.

                  So if they improved their system in two years, then why, instead of communication antennas, they began to use radio telescopes at three points - can you explain such a paradox from a technical point of view? Or, again, they were wrong in their calculations?
              2. Simargl
                Simargl 22 February 2021 07: 12
                0
                Quote: ccsr
                Can you find it yourself if you decide to dig deep?
                I won't even try, because the assumption that before Apollo 10, a year and a half (after the last publication), they did nothing ... a bold assumption.
                Wild hamsters write that the T-14 will not go into production in its current configuration. Describe perceived and real problems. However, to assume that they are hesitant ... not so-so statement.
                I will repeat the question again: is there any literature claiming that at least Apollo 10 flew with unresolved problems?
                So I can find the statements of philosophers that flight is impossible. Quite fresh - just 300 years before Sputnik.
              3. ccsr
                ccsr 22 February 2021 11: 26
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                I won't even try, because the assumption that before Apollo 10, a year and a half (after the last publication), they did nothing ... a bold assumption.

                So you post the material where it is proven that they did something, and I will believe you. At the same time, explain why their 26-meter parabolic antennas turned out to be unsuitable for receiving television signals, if, according to their own calculations, this should have happened in normal mode. At the same time, explain why they received a TV signal from the Moon to the perforated antenna of the radio telescope even with a strong wind and deformation of the mirror, and we in Evpatoria could not accept an antenna with a solid mirror, but of a smaller diameter, when they were working for Madrid. Share your thoughts, since you understand this ...
              4. Simargl
                Simargl 22 February 2021 12: 42
                -1
                Quote: ccsr
                So you will post material where it is proven that they did something, and I will believe you.
                Well, you discard the materials showing that they were there (which means they solved the problems). What's the use of looking for something?

                Quote: ccsr
                26 meter parabolic antennas turned out to be unsuitable for receiving television signals
                What is it like? Sometimes they accepted, sometimes they didn't ...

                Quote: ccsr
                At the same time, explain why they received a TV signal from the Moon to the perforated antenna of the radio telescope even with a powerful wind and deformation of the mirror, and we in Evpatoria could not accept an antenna with a solid mirror, but of a smaller diameter, when they worked for Madrid
                Maybe design flaws? Wrong trick? Specialists will tell you. The problem is that it was necessary to send the signal from the Moon towards the planet, but the terrestrial antennas - strictly to the object ... if there was no power of the object.
              5. ccsr
                ccsr 22 February 2021 13: 19
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                Well, you discard the materials showing that they were there (which means they solved the problems). What's the use of looking for something?

                So there are also a lot of materials that it was falsification now, but you don't believe them. Why should I, without proof, believe that they have altered the communications system if no one in the world could receive their television signal?
                Quote: Simargl
                What is it like? Sometimes they accepted, sometimes they didn't ...

                You don't seem to know which antenna the first landing was received. Let me remind you that in Parks they received a 64-meter perforated radio telescope antenna, which has approximately an efficiency of 0,55 when converted to antennas with a solid mirror. We had a 32-meter antenna in Crimea, and if we take into account some specific points, such as the effect of even heating or wind on the gain of such antennas, it turns out that our antenna was not much inferior to the American one in this regard. But the Americans first convinced everyone that it would be possible to receive on a 26 meter antenna, and then it turned out that no one could do it.
                Quote: Simargl
                The problem is that it was necessary to send the signal from the Moon towards the planet, but the terrestrial antennas - strictly to the object ... if there was no power of the object.

                The problem is that radio telescopes usually work in the millimeter and higher frequency range, but the Apollo used 13 cm wavelength. If you understand the principle of operation of parabolic antennas, then when the curvature changes, this will not greatly affect the millimeter range, but will affect the gain on the centimeter range.
                I will not load further, but best of all I let down our television "specialists", like cosmonaut Leonov, who claimed that we saw how the Americans landed on the moon, so this is academician B. Chertok:
                Television reports on the first landing on the moon in human history were broadcast by all countries except the USSR and China. To watch the broadcast from the United States available to the whole world, we had to go to NII-88, where the image was transmitted via cable from the television center. The television center itself received it on the Eurovision channel. (B. Chertok. Rockets and people. Lunar race.)
              6. Simargl
                Simargl 22 February 2021 13: 50
                0
                Quote: ccsr
                So there are also a lot of materials that it was falsification now, but you don't believe them.
                How can I believe them, if 99% is destroyed by school physics, the remaining 1% are crucified by specialists?

                Quote: ccsr
                Why should I, without evidence, believe that they have altered the communication system if no one in the world could receive their television signal?
                Why couldn't that? Where do you even say that they could not?

                Quote: ccsr
                You don't seem to know which antenna the first landing was received. Let me remind you that in Parks they received a 64-meter perforated radio telescope antenna, which has approximately an efficiency of 0,55 when converted to antennas with a solid mirror.
                0,55 is the mirror fill factor? Why make a perforated one if you can make it smaller, but solid?

                Quote: ccsr
                We had a 32-meter antenna in Crimea, and if we take into account some specific points, such as the effect of even heating or wind on the gain of such antennas, it turns out that our antenna was not much inferior to the American one in this regard.
                The antenna gain may be higher for us, but due to the signal-to-noise ratio of the receiver, the allocated signal may be worse.
                However, you have it written. Why ignore?

                Quote: ccsr
                but the centimeter will affect the gain.
                How will this affect the parameters "necessary and sufficient", if the main work was done in general by 9 meters?

                Quote: ccsr
                To watch the broadcast from the United States available to the whole world, we had to go to NII-88, where the image was transmitted via cable from the television center.
                Those. Chertok, in fact, claims that the transmission was ...
              7. ccsr
                ccsr 22 February 2021 19: 09
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                Why couldn't that? Where do you even say that they could not?

                Nobody was able to show even a recording of these signals - that says everything. By the way, the British recorded the transfer of images from our lunar rover and published them in print before us. And this already removes any questions whether our lunar rover worked on the moon.
                Quote: Simargl
                0,55 is the mirror fill factor? Why make a perforated one if you can make it smaller, but solid?

                For studying very weak signals coming from space. These are non-communication antennas that use stronger transmission signals. And why the Americans are suddenly so fussing, ask them - maybe you will find their explanation.
                Quote: Simargl
                How will this affect the parameters "necessary and sufficient", if the main work was done in general by 9 meters?

                These worked in the near-earth segment of the flight, and larger antennas were required to receive signals from the moon.
                Quote: Simargl
                Those. Chertok, in fact, claims that the transmission was ...

                No Chertok confirmed that we saw only what the Americans showed us - we could not even record the original television signal from the Moon at that time.
              8. Simargl
                Simargl 22 February 2021 21: 07
                0
                Quote: ccsr
                Nobody was able to show even a recording of these signals - that says everything.
                What is "everything" about? Perhaps somewhere there are technological recordings (those from which they were later played on a special TV set), it is even possible that there is equipment for playback (a TV set is not needed) and maybe then ...
                Have posted thousands of hours of telemetry and audio, by the way. In the public domain. I do not know the address - I was not interested: I understand English very poorly by ear.

                Quote: ccsr
                By the way, the British recorded the transfer of images from our lunar rover and published them in print before us.
                It is easier with pictures: they "weigh" less.
                There are no problems with photos and Apollo www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/albums

                Quote: ccsr
                For studying very weak signals coming from space.
                You have not answered the question: why make a perforated antenna if, as you claim, it has a lower gain than a solid one? I know that if the grating (or perforation, in your opinion) is less than the wavelength, then there is no difference.

                Quote: ccsr
                These are non-communication antennas that use stronger transmission signals.
                What?! Phased antennas add efficiency ...

                Quote: ccsr
                Why are the Americans suddenly so fussing
                With what?!

                Quote: ccsr
                These worked in the near-earth segment of the flight, and larger antennas were required to receive signals from the moon.
                Not true! All the main work was done through the 9th antenna: telemetry, negotiations. Large plates were used for the video. And the video, just not a lot.

                Quote: ccsr
                No Chertok confirmed that we saw only what the Americans showed us - we could not even record the original television signal from the Moon at that time.
                But this is just not a confirmation of the fact of landing and is absolutely not a denial.
              9. ccsr
                ccsr 23 February 2021 12: 04
                -1
                Quote: Simargl
                What is "everything" about?

                Nobody can confirm the version of the landing.
                Quote: Simargl
                Have posted thousands of hours of telemetry and audio, by the way.

                This is not evidence of a landing, if only because they could do all of this from the orbit of the moon without landing.
                Quote: Simargl
                It is easier with pictures: they "weigh" less.

                It's not about the volume, but about the INDEPENDENT reception of the work of the transmitters of our lunar rover.
                Quote: Simargl
                You have not answered the question: why make a perforated antenna if, as you claim, it has a lower gain than a solid one?

                There is a size limit for solid-mirror antennas and this is due to the wind load and the mass of the rotary devices. A perforated antenna allows you to increase the area, but other problems already appear there, including deformation of the mirror from wind load, from heating, and a number of other reasons. That is why they are suitable for radio astronomy observations, but they are practically not used for communication systems. In simpler terms, the difference between them is like between a microscope and binoculars.
                Quote: Simargl
                What!

                Yes, nothing, but the fact that in real communication systems the power of signals is many orders of magnitude superior to that coming from deep space.
                Quote: Simargl
                With what?!

                Using radio telescopes.
                Quote: Simargl
                Not true! All the main work was done through the 9th antenna: telemetry, negotiations. Large plates were used for the video. And the video, just not a lot.

                I do not know how much information went through this or that antenna when the astronauts worked from the Moon, but I have big doubts that everything was received here on 9 meter antennas. But this is not even the point, but the fact that the Americans did not initially assume that they would only use radio telescopes to broadcast the first landing.
                By the way, Shuneiko refutes you:
                Communication with Apollo is divided into 2 stages: at the first stage, during the launch and flight in orbit of the satellite, the communication network uses a chain of stations equipped with 9 antennas; in the second stage, when Apollo is more than 18 km away from Earth, communication is carried out by more powerful and more accurate antennas with diameters of 000 m and 26 m.

                Will you argue with him?
                Quote: Simargl
                But this is just not a confirmation of the fact of landing and is absolutely not a denial.

                But it also does not prove that at that time we could have seen the landing itself, which means that we could have sold Kubrick's work.
              10. Simargl
                Simargl 23 February 2021 17: 50
                -2
                Quote: ccsr
                Nobody can confirm the version of the landing.
                Yes, the adepts do not care about everything. At such a rate, it is possible to "lower" Gagarin. Strictly speaking, he did not fulfill the conditions of the FAI, and the orbital flight was not entirely full (less than a revolution).

                Quote: ccsr
                This is not evidence of disembarkation
                I remember, I remember: and thousands of photographs and films / videos were filmed in Hollywood.

                Quote: ccsr
                A perforated antenna allows you to increase the area, but other problems already appear there, including deformation of the mirror from wind load, from heating, and a number of other reasons.
                Don't you understand the question? Even when I answered it ... the question was:
                Quote: Simargl
                You have not answered the question: why make a perforated antenna, if, as you claim, does it have a lower gain than a solid one?
                You gave the figure 0,55, i.e., as I understand it, the metal fill factor, but what prevents you from making the antenna smaller in area, but with 100% filling? How do you think?

                Quote: ccsr
                That is why they are suitable for radio astronomy observations, but they are practically not used for communication systems.

                The problem is that a slit mirror is not universal and has an upper limit in the range, while on a solid one you hang it up, you will receive it (the exception is when both the coating and the material begin to influence). But I talked about this.
                Quote: ccsr
                In simpler terms, the difference between them is like between a microscope and binoculars.
                To put it simply, you don't know how it works. Although, if you were engaged in optics, you should have heard about diffraction at least.

                Quote: ccsr
                but I have big doubts that everything was received here on 9 meter antennas.
                Large radio telescopes are quite rare. 9-meter meters were even on ships, they ensured the continuity of telemetry and voice transmission.

                Quote: ccsr
                but I have big doubts that everything was received here on 9 meter antennas.
                First, at least the television signal was received at 26 meters. Secondly, they were accepted by all available, and broadcast to the MCC from those where the quality is better. Probably logical ...

                Quote: ccsr
                the Americans initially did not expect that they would only use radio telescopes to broadcast the first landing
                Not understood...

                Quote: ccsr
                By the way, Shuneiko refutes you:
                A NASA staff member?

                Quote: ccsr
                But it also does not prove that we could at that time see the landing itself
                Strictly speaking, the landing itself could be observed only on the spot, by the astronauts themselves, and the rest - the broadcast in some kind of approximation.

                Quote: ccsr
                which means that we could have sold Kubrick's work.
                This is the wildest nonsense that a conspiracy theorist can throw out of his inflamed brain !!! It is a conspiracy theorist, because a person who is easily deceived by the most delusional statement, without bothering to double-check the facts even a little bit.
                The nut is a simpleton. Since he believes in a conspiracy "theory" at such an unpretentious level of refutability - a fool conspiracy theorist ... a conspiracy theorist.
                Look at movies about space. At least some intelligible ones, with minimally approximate parameters of physics in the frame, they began to shoot in the late 80s, not earlier. And already in the films of the early 70s - physics causes a wild laugh!
              11. ccsr
                ccsr 23 February 2021 19: 44
                -1
                Quote: Simargl
                At such a rate, it is possible to "lower" Gagarin.

                Gagarin's flight was repeated by hundreds of people from different countries, but even fifty years later, not a single country in the world, including the United States, approached the landing on the moon.
                Quote: Simargl
                You gave the figure 0,55, i.e., as I understand it, the metal fill factor,

                This coefficient of efficiency of the antenna, and the antenna has areas with a continuous reflective surface, and areas of perforation. So your calculation for metal filling is wrong, more complex calculations are used there. A factor of 0,55 means that it will be somewhere in the efficiency of a 44-46 meter antenna, but subject to a number of conditions.
                Quote: Simargl
                 Used, also how

                The point is to make antennas of a larger diameter if you can get by with smaller antennas? They are made for completely different purposes.
                Quote: Simargl
                Large radio telescopes are quite rare. 9 meters were even on ships,

                There are no 9 meter radio telescopes. That is why large ones are not used for communication systems.
                Quote: Simargl
                First, at least the television signal was received at 26 meters.

                No, all receptions of television signals went to antennas of a larger diameter, and even we in Evpatoria could not receive a stable signal from the Moon when they were working for Madrid.
                Quote: Simargl
                Not understood...

                Quote: Simargl
                A NASA staff member?

                If you ask such questions, then it hardly makes sense to discuss more complex problems with you.
                Quote: Simargl
                This is the wildest nonsense that a conspiracy theorist can throw out of his inflamed brain !!!

                I didn't expect you to be an ordinary hysterical woman. Burn on ...
              12. Simargl
                Simargl 23 February 2021 21: 32
                -1
                Quote: ccsr
                but even fifty years later, not a single country in the world, including the United States, approached the landing on the moon
                Now make the traditional mistake of conspiracy theorists and explain: why repeat?
                And another group of questions:
                - Why did the Americans not bang in response something more powerful than AN602 (this is "Tsar Bomba", if that)?
                - Why has no one in the world tried to repeat SR-71, B-2?
                - Why were there fewer people in the Mariana Trench than on the Moon? And with what fright is it easier to believe descending there than in flight?

                Quote: ccsr
                A factor of 0,55 means that it will be somewhere in the efficiency of a 44-46 meter antenna, but subject to a number of conditions.
                I was just thinking: when you take me out into the open ... it didn’t work: The coefficient 0,55 is the average utilization rate of the surface of the "straight" (whose axis looks at the signal) of the antenna, which is shaded by the receiver. Leave the nonsense about 44-46 meters to yourself.

                Quote: ccsr
                So your calculation for metal filling is wrong, more complex calculations are used there.
                Yeah. The wire pitch depends on the wavelength, it is about 0,1 of the shortest (I can be a little wrong).

                Quote: ccsr
                They are made for completely different purposes.
                For which ones? You then claim that the coefficient is 0,55 due to the fact that it is "perforated" (however, the wild recalculation in your alternative universe gives 44-46 m, which is about 4 times the area ...)

                Quote: ccsr
                There are no 9 meter radio telescopes.
                I answered the words about antennas, in one sentence the word "telescope" does not occur with the 9-meter ones.

                Quote: ccsr
                That is why large ones are not used for communication systems.
                How this is connected - I did not understand at all. Renting a telescope for communication for a while is not an insurmountable task.
                By the way, there are dishes of radio telescopes of a much smaller diameter - 2,5 m ...

                Quote: ccsr
                No, all receptions of television signals went to antennas of a larger diameter, and even we in Evpatoria could not receive a stable signal from the Moon when they were working for Madrid.
                Firstly, the signal was not broadcast to any Madrid! For this, the LM antenna had to have an auto-rotate mechanism, but there was nothing like that. The signal was broadcast to the planet. Everything.
                Secondly, not in Evpatoria, but in Shkolny, TNA-400.
                Third, from December 1968 to November 1969, the spacecraft of the Apollo-8, Apollo-10, Apollo-11, and Apollo-12 expeditions were monitored. All these spacecraft received good quality telephone conversations between astronauts and the Earth and telemetric information about the state of onboard systems. The received television signal was of poor quality due to the insufficient level of the energy potential of the radio link based on the 32-meter antenna. And the only problem is that the first step was definitely not seen! Because Armstrong did it when the TNA-400 was on the other side of the Earth. But that broadcast was not only of the first step!

                Quote: ccsr
                If you ask such questions, then it hardly makes sense to discuss more complex problems with you.
                I also start to get bored with crazy ideas:
                What does it have to do with what they assumed? Before disembarking, they drove there twice to figure out what they needed.
                Who is Shuneiko to assert something?

                Quote: ccsr
                I didn't expect you to be an ordinary hysterical woman.
                Right, to assert to a person who has watched a fairly large number of space fiction films and roughly represents the possibilities even of Hollywood of those years that they surpassed themselves and filmed as the 90s (this is the most optimistic assessment) ... You can, of course, provide at least one Hollywood work, where physics at least comes close to real ... I I BELIEVE!!!
              13. ccsr
                ccsr 24 February 2021 12: 19
                -1
                Quote: Simargl
                - Why did the Americans not bang in response something more powerful than AN602 (this is "Tsar Bomba", if that)?

                Couldn't create something like that.

                Quote: Simargl
                Why has no one in the world tried to repeat the SR-71, B-2?

                The Tu-160 is a more complex product than the B-2, and the development of satellite reconnaissance systems sent strategic reconnaissance aircraft of the SR-71 type to a landfill. What is the point of creating them if they are shot down at the entrance to the air border of our enemy?
                Quote: Simargl
                For which ones?

                For radio astronomy observations.
                Quote: Simargl
                (however a wild recount in your alternate universe gives 44-46 m,

                Try to refute it to begin with, and it will be seen who is wild here.
                Quote: Simargl
                Renting a telescope for communication for a while is not an insurmountable task.

                And why rent someone else's radio telescope, if they could receive this signal on their communication antennas, according to them?

                Quote: Simargl
                Firstly, the signal was not broadcast to any Madrid!

                To eliminate your illiteracy, read at least the American authors, since Shuneiko was not mastered:
                The Apollo spacecraft equipment provides communication and trajectory measurements using the points of the command-measuring complex, which includes 11 fixed ground stations [about. Guam, Carnarvon (Australia), Guaymas (Mexico), about. Ascension, oh. B. Bahama, Bermuda, Corpus Christi, about. Antigua, Hawaii, about. Gran Canaria and the landfill on about. Merritt)], equipped with 9-meter antennas, three stations (Goldstone, Madrid, Canberra), equipped with 26-meter antennas, and several ship and aircraft tracking stations.



                Quote: Simargl
                Third, from December 1968 to November 1969, the spacecraft of the Apollo-8, Apollo-10, Apollo-11, and Apollo-12 expeditions were monitored. All these spacecraft received good quality telephone conversations between astronauts and the Earth and telemetric information about the state of onboard systems.

                Do you have any idea how the width of the television signal spectrum differs from the spectra of speech and telemetry? The power of the transmitter was enough for the transmission of speech and telemetry, but for television broadcasting they had to be turned off - as the Americans themselves wrote. Negotiations by themselves do not yet indicate that astronauts have landed on the moon. I'm not even talking about the fact that there were tape recorders on board the Apollo, and they could simply record certain texts and then give them out. By the way, the Americans also received the conversation of our astronauts with good quality through the lunar repeater, and they were sure that they were in the orbit of the moon.
                Quote: Simargl
                "That is, the TV signal was received, but the quality was poor, most likely due to the insufficient signal-to-noise ratio (the Americans froze the amplifier for this).

                What nonsense - we also used cryogenic cooling of amplifiers from the first flights. But why the fact that the Americans planned to receive at 26 meters, we could not accept at 32 meters, you will hardly ever explain.

                Quote: Simargl
                Because Armstrong did it when TNA-400 was on the other side of the Earth. But that broadcast was not only the first step!

                So no one in the world received all the other television broadcasts - you are probably not in the subject.
                Quote: Simargl
                Before disembarking, they drove there twice to figure out what they needed.

                How can you prove that they drove there, if we did not have objective means of control over this flight? Trust Americans at their word?
                Quote: Simargl
                I BELIEVE !!!

                You don’t need to believe in anything - refute at least what experts consider impossible to be done by the Americans on those expeditions. I asked a few questions about the camera, try at least to answer them to understand your level of knowledge of physics.
              14. Simargl
                Simargl 24 February 2021 13: 56
                +1
                Quote: ccsr
                Couldn't create something like that.
                So we created that. And they banged.
                Quote: ccsr
                Tu-160 is a more complex product than B-2
                Than? Engines?

                Quote: ccsr
                the development of satellite reconnaissance systems sent strategic reconnaissance aircraft of the SR-71 type to a landfill. What is the point of creating them if they are shot down at the entrance to the air border of our enemy?
                The SR-71 died as soon as the air defense was sufficient. No satellite has yet replaced aerial photography.
                Another thing is that for barmaley SR-71 is redundant and very expensive to operate. No wonder they "scratch their stump" while working on the SR-72?
                What do we have? Vanguard?

                Quote: ccsr
                For radio astronomy observations.
                And how does it differ from receiving telemetry or a TV signal, for example?

                Quote: ccsr
                Try to refute it to begin with, and it will be seen who is wild here.
                Refute what? The fact that the area of ​​a circle of 46 and 26 m is about, 32 or 3,13 times different?
                The efficiency factor is exactly what I wrote: the area of ​​the shadow from the consoles and the receiver is divided by the area of ​​the mirror.

                Quote: ccsr
                And why rent someone else's radio telescope, if they could receive this signal on their communication antennas, according to them?
                Telemetry and speech - for all deployed, television - only for large ones.
                Quote: from the nonsense that lies
                When Buzz Aldrin turned on the video camera on the Lunar Module, three antennas in auto-tracking mode simultaneously received a signal: the 64-meter Goldstone radio telescope in California, the 26-meter telescope at Honeysuckle Creek near Canberra in Australia, and the 64-meter "saucer" in Parks.

                In the first minutes of the broadcast in search of the best picture NASA chose between signalsreceived from Goldstone and Honeysuckle Creek stations.

                Less than nine minutes later, the broadcast was broadcast live from the Parks Telescope. Parks' image quality was so superior to the other two that NASA selected him as the primary source of television broadcast for the remaining 2,5 hours of live coverage.
                In Parks, the telescope is 64 m, if anything, not 26, 32 or 44/46
                Quote: ccsr
                Do you have any idea how the width of the television signal spectrum differs from the spectra of speech and telemetry?
                I can imagine. Spectrum width depends on the required dynamic range of the signal and the signal-to-noise parameters in the selected signal.
                Quote: ccsr
                Negotiations by themselves do not yet indicate that astronauts have landed on the moon.
                TV signal too. A complex of evidence may already mean something.

                Quote: ccsr
                But why the fact that the Americans planned to receive at 26 meters, we could not accept at 32 meters, you will hardly ever explain.
                Planned and accepted. And I have already explained, I clarify: if they used a telescope in Parks, then the Crimean one was difficult to use - they would have to direct a mirror into the ground, but the planet only does not delay neutrinos, with radio waves it is getting worse. was in the shadows.

                Quote: ccsr
                So no one in the world received all the other television broadcasts - you are probably not in the subject.
                Should have? At least three plates were accepted: see the extract from the nonsense above.

                Quote: ccsr
                How can you prove that they drove there, if we did not have objective means of control over this flight?
                For objective control, you need to access the parameters of the equipment in order to know exactly what to control.
                It was indirect.

                Quote: ccsr
                Trust Americans at their word?
                They believed in Gagarin.

                Quote: ccsr
                You don’t need to believe in anything - refute at least what experts believe it was impossible for the Americans to do on those expeditions.
                Is this Mukhina, or what? So he is not an expert.

                Quote: ccsr
                I asked a few questions about the camera, try at least to answer them to understand your level of knowledge of physics.
                The examiner was found! I myself could not say anything intelligible when asked about the temperature range! I repeat: my DSLR from -43C to + 52C worked, although the manufacturer declared 0- + 40C
                In the sun, not everything heats up immediately to the maximum temperature of 128C, and not everything up to 128C - maybe more and less.
              15. ccsr
                ccsr 24 February 2021 18: 50
                -1
                Quote: Simargl
                The SR-71 died as soon as the air defense was sufficient. No satellite has yet replaced aerial photography.

                What makes you think that these planes flew to the countries of the Warsaw Pact? In wartime, they would simply be shot down, and on this all their benefits would evaporate.
                Quote: Simargl
                And how does it differ from receiving telemetry or a TV signal, for example?

                Those that are sharpened for millimeter wavelengths. Apollo used 13 cm waves. If you had an idea of ​​how parabolic antennas work and knew how the curvature of the mirror affects the gain, then you would not ask stupid questions.

                Quote: Simargl
                In Parks, the telescope is 64 m, if anything, not 26, 32 or 44/46

                If you recount a 64-meter telescope with 55% efficiency, then you will understand where the 42-44 meter figure for a solid mirror came from.
                Quote: Simargl
                Planned and accepted. And I have already explained, I clarify: if they already used the telescope in Parks, then the Crimean one was difficult to use - they would have to direct a mirror into the ground,

                You again didn’t understand nifiga - we could not receive the first television reception in order to see a television signal, we did not have the equipment for this, and Evpatoria was generally out of sight of the moon. We are talking about later flights, when we have already developed special equipment for this under the leadership of M.S. Ryazansky.
                Quote: Simargl
                For objective control, you need to access the parameters of the equipment in order to know exactly what to control.
                It was indirect.

                It was not, it seems to you so:
                1. The order to organize tracking of the Apollo came from the Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee D. Ustinov. The Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee is a very significant position in the structure of the political leadership of the USSR. After the person number 1, which was the general secretary, there were about a dozen secretaries of the Central Committee, each of whom, on behalf of the Central Committee, directed a certain sector of state affairs. D. Ustinov was in charge of the country's defense industry. The Soviet space program was part of this sector. And the fact that such a high statesman gave the task to follow the "Apollo" allows us to treat E. Molotov's message with due attention.
                2. The system for tracking Soviet spacecraft that existed at the time of the order turned out to be useless for tracking the Apollo for the reasons indicated in the article.
                3. Hastily (within 1 year) created a special complex in Simferopol. The presence of only one signal receiving point and the daily rotation of the Earth led to the fact that the complex could track the Apollo for a small part of the day. E. Molotov speaks about this quite clearly in his article.
                4. From excerpt (4) of the article it follows that:
                - “ours” did not record the fact of the Apollo's departure from near-earth orbit towards the Moon,
                - “ours” did not follow the movement of the Apollo along the Earth-Moon route;

                Because if we “fixed” and “tracked”, then there would be no need to use American radio messages about the time of launch and arrival to the Moon “for calculating target designations to the antenna”.
                5. As a result of their observations, the specialists of the Research Institute of KP were able to establish that radio information was really coming to the Earth from the Moon (including on the TV channel).
                6. It is not clear what E. Molotov was guided by when he gave his article the title “We“ saw ”how the Americans landed on the moon ...”? Is the picture (Fig. 2) worth such loud words? And how does his article "finally close the 'ridiculous' question 'Were Americans on the moon?'
                We know from the example of the "Probe" (see. Introduction) that it is possible to speak "from the Moon" even while on Earth. Broadcasting options may vary. And we do not know on what vehicles (automatic "lunar" or manned "Apollo") these "radio informants" arrived to the Moon. We do not know, because, as follows from E. Molotov's article, the path of the Apollo from the Earth to the Moon was not traced.
                The first telecast of the Earth's rise over the lunar horizon was conducted by the American automatic lunar satellite Orbiter 2 years and 4 months before the first American manned flight to the Moon (A-8). And nothing prevents us from suggesting that E. Molotov watched the replay of such a program in a more modern version. Although for the quality with which E. Molotov and his colleagues observed the rise of the Earth over the lunar horizon (Fig. 2), any performance would be suitable.

                Quote: Simargl
                I repeat: my DSLR from -43C to + 52C worked, although the manufacturer declared 0- + 40C
                In the sun, not everything heats up immediately to the maximum temperature of 128C, and not everything up to 128C - maybe more and less.

                After all, you're not lying without blushing - no DSLR normally at -43C will work if you don't keep it under your clothes. After 20-30 minutes, it will freeze so much that all chemical reactions on the film simply will not occur as expected. Not to mention the fact that if there is lubricant on the engine, then it will also freeze and fail with the scrolling of the film due to frozen power sources. As for +52 С, this is far from + 70- + 90С, so you don't have to push in different nonsense about your experience. I also shoot on the beach with a DSLR in the summer, and I always hid it in a trunk and a bag, and at the same time I always keep it in the shade.


                Quote: Simargl
                In the sun, everything does not immediately heat up to the maximum temperature

                I was present at the tests of solar panels - after 2,5 - 3 minutes their surface heated up to 70C under illumination with a power of 1400 watts per square meter. And after 10-20 minutes up to 90 C they will definitely heat up, because there will be practically no heat sink in a vacuum.
              16. Simargl
                Simargl 24 February 2021 21: 17
                0
                Quote: ccsr
                What makes you think that these planes flew to the countries of the Warsaw Pact?
                I don't know how over the CMEA, but it flew over the USSR. The MiG-25 was specially made for it, if that.
                Quote: ccsr
                In wartime, they would simply be shot down, and on this all their benefits would evaporate.
                Yeah, in the east, they fired at them under 1000 shots - no result.
                Quote: ccsr
                Those that are sharpened for millimeter wavelengths. Apollo used 13 cm waves.
                So what?
                Quote: ccsr
                If you had an idea of ​​how parabolic antennas work and knew how the curvature of the mirror affects the gain, then you would not ask stupid questions.
                Still, a stupid question arose: the first "run" of the telescope was at 408 MHz (1964 - 1966) the second - at 2700 MHz (1968-1980), so which of these ranges is millimeter? And how does a constant mirror interfere (or interfere) with working from 13 mm to 10500 mm?

                Quote: ccsr
                If you recount a 64-meter telescope with 55% efficiency, then you will understand where the 42-44 meter figure for a solid mirror came from.
                Is it so hard to open a calculator to calculate? (42 ÷ 64) ² = 0,43, (44 ÷ 64) ² = 0,47. I have already said that 0,55 is the average antenna efficiency coefficient, it can be more or less, depending on the receiver, with the same mirror.

                Quote: ccsr
                You again didn’t understand nifiga - we could not receive the first television reception at all in order to see the television signal, we did not have the equipment for this
                Remind in what year did you start broadcasting the signal? This is not 1969. And I am not television at all.

                Quote: ccsr
                2. Existing at the time of order the tracking system for Soviet spacecraft turned out to be useless for tracking the Apollo for the reasons indicated in the article.
                Please remind me what year the order was issued?
                Quote: ccsr
                4. From excerpt (4) of the article it follows that:
                - “ours” did not record the fact of the Apollo's departure from near-earth orbit towards the Moon,
                - “ours” did not follow the movement of the Apollo along the Earth-Moon route;
                Because if we “fixed” and “tracked”, then there would be no need to use American radio messages about the time of launch and arrival to the Moon “for calculating target designations to the antenna”.
                Why?
                Quote: We "saw" how the Americans landed on the moon ... E.P. Molotov
                In order to track ships during their flight in orbits around the Moon and when landing on its surface, it was necessary to have ballistic data of these orbits for calculating target designations to the antenna. However, such information was not published by the Americans. Therefore, the data on the orbits of the flight were calculated by ballistics based on the time of launch and arrival to the Moon of the Apollo spacecraft, which were reported on American radio. Based on these data, target designations for pointing the antenna were calculated, which were refined according to the signals received by the control complex from the lunar ships.
                The author of the conclusion that they did not follow - the logic is not even feminine: there was no data to give coordinates for antennas earlier - it was necessary to calculate.

                Quote: ccsr
                And nothing prevents us from suggesting that E. Molotov watched the replay of such a program in a more modern version.
                Repetition of the transmission of the rising of the Earth over the Moon? Actually, it shows an example of how crap the picture was.

                Quote: ccsr
                After all, you're not lying without blushing - no DSLR will work normally at -43C if you don't keep it under your clothes.
                Surgut, Sochi ... Nikon D50 ... an ancient device that can hardly move already - it has surpassed its resource of 10000 frames already 7 times. The film drove at least to -25C somewhere.
                Quote: ccsr
                After 20-30 minutes, it will freeze so much that all chemical reactions on the film simply will not occur as expected.
                Batteries - yes: enough for about 30 frames, although under normal conditions up to 1500 ...
                However, I indicated this not to "brag" - I asked a question before that.
                However, the Americans themselves write:
                The film was not in vacuum for more than 8 hours, and kept in the temperature range of 10 ° -38 ° С

                In addition, shooting against the light is so-so pleasure, which means that cameras were more often filmed "correctly" and were in the shadow of the astronauts ...

                Quote: ccsr
                I attended solar panel tests
                It was not necessary to feel the panel, whose task is to absorb light and convert it with an efficiency of 15% (too lazy to google, but 10-20%, it seems) ... and the rest is heating the panel.
              17. ccsr
                ccsr 25 February 2021 13: 10
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                I don't know how over CMEA, but over the USSR he flew

                Powers flew too, and how did it end? After his flight, if the Americans entered our airspace, it was only for short distances. And they did not need to do this, since detailed reconnaissance satellites appeared in the 60s.
                Quote: Simargl
                Still, a stupid question arose: the first "run" of the telescope was at 408 MHz (1964 - 1966) the second - at 2700 MHz (1968-1980), so which of these ranges is millimeter?

                And no one says that a radio telescope cannot receive these waves - its linear dimensions are such that it will even receive HF and VHF waves if the appropriate receiving devices are connected.
                Quote: Simargl
                Is it so hard to open a calculator to calculate? (42 ÷ 64) ² = 0,43, (44 ÷ 64) ² = 0,47.

                Yes, it is not considered so, if only because the surface of the radio telescope has a partly solid surface, and partly perforated. Your calculation would be correct if we were talking about a 64-meter radio telescope with a CONTINUOUS mirror surface, which are not in the world - you are not in the subject here, and you are still trying to teach me.

                Quote: Simargl
                The author of the conclusion that they did not follow - the logic is not even feminine: there was no data to give coordinates for antennas earlier - it was necessary to calculate.

                The author writes about what he knows, but what you know on this topic is still incomprehensible to me, because you shyly keep silent about where you worked in order to evaluate what was said.
                Quote: Simargl
                The film drove at least to -25C somewhere.

                Stop lying - I've been using different Canonomies since the nineties, and I know perfectly well that when walking, film always had to be kept under a jacket at -15C, and taken out only for the duration of the shooting, and then hidden again to get normal pictures.
                "Chased" a couple of minutes or five - so what? Or after thirty minutes at -25C, when you had it hanging on your belt without a wardrobe trunk in such a frost?
                Quote: Simargl
                However, the Americans themselves write:
                The film has not been in a vacuum for more than 8 hours, and kept in the temperature range of 10 ° -38 ° С

                And how did they ensure this if they did not have containers and the apparatus was not protected?
                Quote: Simargl
                It was not necessary to feel the panel, whose task is to absorb light and convert it with an efficiency of 15% (too lazy to google, but 10-20%, it seems) ... and the rest is heating the panel.

                Do not comment on what you do not know - when heating above 40C, the efficiency of solar converters begins to fall, and in order to maintain the specified current characteristics, it is necessary to increase the size of the panels. That is why this process is very important when testing - google it, you might find something about it.
              18. Simargl
                Simargl 25 February 2021 13: 48
                -1
                Quote: ccsr
                Powers flew too, and how did it end?
                With you it becomes not interesting: you do not remember what I wrote. And I wrote that the same SR-71 became useless with the advent of the corresponding air defense (including the MiG-25).

                Quote: ccsr
                And they did not need to do this, since detailed reconnaissance satellites appeared in the 60s.
                Don't know how to read again? The point of writing? I wrote that the satellite is not a panacea.

                Quote: ccsr
                And no one says that a radio telescope cannot receive these waves - its linear dimensions are such that it will even receive HF and VHF waves if the appropriate receiving devices are connected.
                In fact, you run into the fact that this is impossible to do, since it was designed for the millimeter range and, like, could not be reconfigured. You are in a frying pan. Mukhinobreda read, and then carry nonsense to the masses with immature minds!

                Quote: ccsr
                Your calculation would be correct if we were talking about a 64 meter radio telescope with a CONTINUOUS mirror surface
                In a puddle, you get notable bubbles: surface perforation is calculated based on wavelengths. I showed you 5-meter telescopes - there are not perforations, but rarely stretched cables. So you don't understand how it works, although similar effects are used in optics. Or do you still have XNUMX classes of education?

                Quote: ccsr
                you are not in the subject here, but you are still trying to teach me.
                I know how the telescope works, that's why it was funny about the fixed range.
                Quote: ccsr
                The author writes about what he knows
                The author directly indicates that he is "analyzing" Molotov's text. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the original article. However, from what he found - his conclusions are strange, even based on what he quotes (some "author").
                Quote: ccsr
                because you shyly keep silent about where you worked in order to evaluate what was said.
                I do not need to measure who is longer (track record) - I provide data that can be verified and which are logical.

                Quote: ccsr
                Stop lying
                Well, neuritis!
                If you do as you do - then condensate can be drained from the carcass!
                I don't remember when I used the film. Digitizer for 15 years already. so: if you need to shoot in the cold, the carcass in the trunk, and don't stick it in the bosom, but the battery - in the bosom and the camera on external (which is in the bosom) power supply ... by the way, the sights are powered in the same way: at negative temperatures the battery bosom.

                Quote: ccsr
                And how did they ensure this if they did not have containers and the apparatus was not protected?
                I have no idea. But they filmed, for the most part, with the sun behind them. So they are unlikely to get very hot. After all, spacesuits generally spend 8 hours in the sun. However, why the camera in the picture is covered with a cloth - you do not know. How, it seems, you do not know that the carcass is heated to the temperature of this rag.

                Quote: ccsr
                Do not comment on what you do not know - when heating above 40C, the efficiency of solar converters begins to fall
                I completely agree: do not comment on what you do not understand: the efficiency of the joint venture is up to 20%, the rest is heating. This is what I wrote about. However, I did not write anything specific about the efficiency - only general ideas.
                Do not attribute nonsense to me!
              19. ccsr
                ccsr 25 February 2021 14: 22
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                ... And I wrote that the same SR-71 became useless with the advent of the corresponding air defense (including the MiG-25).

                Why then was he dragged in, if we are talking about space?

                Quote: Simargl
                surface perforation is calculated based on wavelengths.

                Perforation is calculated from the wind load for rotary mirrors, and for radio telescopes of the RATAN-600 type, no perforation is needed at all, although the diameter of the reflecting surfaces there is much larger, and it works in the range - 610 MHz-35 GHz


                Quote: Simargl
                If you do as you do - then condensate can be drained from the carcass!

                Never leaked, so don't fantasize. I use digital no less than yours from the first XNUMXth canon, so be careful with your tales of how best to shoot in the cold, I also didn’t slurp soup.
                By the way, how did the Americans compose an almost perfect composition if the viewfinder was practically invisible through the spacesuit and it was impossible to adjust the aperture and shutter speed? Well, tell me, since you are such a famous photographer, especially since I have laid out the American design of the camera of later models than the Hasselblad 500, where all this is taken into account.
                Quote: Simargl
                I completely agree: do not comment on what you do not understand: the efficiency of the joint venture is up to 20%, the rest is heating.

                You are just dense - this efficiency is not constant, it depends on the heating of the converter, hack it on your nose if you decide to teach me in this matter. At the beginning of the tests, at a temperature of 20C, the efficiency can reach 22-23%, and as it heats up during the tests to 70C, the efficiency drops down to 15-17%, depending on the silicon converters.
                Quote: Simargl
                Do not attribute nonsense to me!

                Yes, you have done so much nonsense without me that it is difficult to understand it.
              20. Simargl
                Simargl 25 February 2021 19: 15
                -1
                Quote: ccsr
                Why then was he dragged in, if we are talking about space?
                It was to the question "no one could repeat". Why are you inattentive?

                Quote: ccsr
                The perforation is calculated from the wind load for the pivoting mirrors,
                Wild nonsense! I have already explained and shown. However, even the fact that this is not perforation - you do not care.

                Quote: ccsr
                radio telescopes like RATAN-600 do not need any perforation at all
                You at least read about the design, or what!

                Quote: ccsr
                although the diameter of the reflecting surfaces there is much larger
                There is a panel mirror: it consists of rectangles.

                Quote: ccsr
                Never leaked, so don't fantasize.
                Condensation is present. Do not flatter yourself. The film is not so sensitive to its presence, but the matrix ...

                Quote: ccsr
                I didn’t eat cabbage soup either
                Well, along the way ... bast shoes.

                Quote: ccsr
                By the way, how the Americans put together an almost perfect composition
                30% of what I saw was stupid for release, 40% - any slag, another 30% - a photo where at least something is visible. And so - yes: perfect compositions.

                Quote: ccsr
                if the viewfinder was practically invisible through the spacesuit
                I'll tell you more: the viewfinder remained on Earth, like the mirror. Well, they were not on those cameras.

                Quote: ccsr
                especially since I have posted the American design of the camera of later models than the Hasselblad 500, where all this is taken into account.
                What is taken into account? NASA requirements? So Hasselblad then introduced many requirements into the following models. For example, the automatic diaphragm.

                Quote: ccsr
                You are just dense - this efficiency
                I? Yes, in general, I do not care about their efficiency, this is not the first time I have spoken about this. You gave an incorrect example!

                Quote: ccsr
                Yes, you have done so much nonsense without me that it is difficult to understand it.
                You don't even try to read. Where exactly is nonsense? From you only and splashes.
              21. ccsr
                ccsr 25 February 2021 20: 09
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                Wild nonsense! I have already explained and shown.

                Have you used parabolic antennas and know at what wind speed they are prohibited to use? Even for 9-16 meter rotary antennas, there are such modes when they are fixed according to metrological conditions.
                Quote: Simargl
                There is a panel mirror: it consists of rectangles.

                Educate yourself what 300-meter radio telescopes are that have a solid mirror, but they are not afraid of the wind load:


                Quote: Simargl
                Condensation is present. Do not flatter yourself.

                Lying, because condensation forms in cold devices that are brought into a warm room. And in the apparatus, which is taken out of a warm jacket in the cold for a minute or two, there can be no condensation, because it does not have time to freeze - learn physics.

                Quote: Simargl
                And so - yes: perfect compositions.

                And how often did you get this on the apparatus hanging on your chest?
                Quote: Simargl
                I'll tell you more: the viewfinder remained on Earth, like the mirror.

                Moreover, how then did they photograph so cleverly? Moreover, if you believe in your percentages, then on the moon they are generally forced to take three times as many photographs - how did they manage it and where did they get so many cassettes, and how were they worn?
                Quote: Simargl
                What is taken into account? NASA requirements? So Hasselblad then introduced many requirements into the following models. For example, the automatic diaphragm.

                Do not wag - they took into account that the body must be thermally insulated. The viewfinder was of a completely different design. Separate shutter release button and two camera holders. All the levers made it possible to exhibit with gloves - and this is where they burned out when they argued that the Hasselblads did all this on a lunar expedition, although he was clearly not adapted for this.
              22. Simargl
                Simargl 25 February 2021 21: 01
                -1
                Quote: ccsr
                Have you used parabolic antennas and know at what wind speed they are prohibited to use?
                Why chatter? There is nothing essentially to say? Understand.

                Quote: ccsr
                And in the apparatus, which is taken out of a warm jacket in the cold for a minute or two, there can be no condensation, because it does not have time to freeze - learn physics.
                So teach. For one thing and see how it turns out.

                Quote: ccsr
                And how often did you get this on the apparatus hanging on your chest?
                Believe it or not: with proper training, it works out quite well with outstretched arms. If your hands are crooked, others may not.

                Quote: ccsr
                Moreover, how then did they photograph so cleverly?
                I repeat: most of the photos are slag.

                Quote: ccsr
                Moreover, if you believe in your percentages, then on the moon they are generally forced to take three times as many photographs - how did they manage it and where did they get so many cassettes, and how were they worn?
                You are not broadcasting nonsense of conspiracy theorists, but see the official data. And from the official albums, but with normal quality (about 4000x4000, by the way), you can take out a lot of interesting things. And yes: there are a lot of pictures.

                Quote: ccsr
                The viewfinder was of a completely different design.
                In a parallel universe, he was there.

                Quote: ccsr
                Separate trigger button
                What!

                Quote: ccsr
                All levers made it possible to expose with gloves
                What are the expositions ?! What are you carrying?!
                Quote: ccsr
                although he is clearly not adapted for this
                I will repeat the question: if the kit of the "civilian" version cost about $ 3000, then why did the "lunar" version cost $ 130 ?!
              23. ccsr
                ccsr 26 February 2021 10: 26
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                Why chatter? There is nothing essentially to say? Understand.

                You don't understand anything - the physical dimensions of antennas with a solid rotating mirror are just limited by the wind load, as well as the mass and reliability of the drive mechanisms.
                .
                Quote: Simargl
                Believe it or not: with proper training, it works out quite well with outstretched arms.

                And on a long exposure - well, well, you are still that "photographer" ...
                Quote: Simargl
                What!

                And what's on the left-hand holder:

                Quote: Simargl
                I will repeat the question: if the kit of the "civilian" version cost about $ 3000, then why did the "lunar" version cost $ 130 ?!

                Yes, this is a common practice, when some products are subjected to additional tests, several units are purchased and, in general, all costs are then transferred to the samples transferred to the customer. You are just an amateur in these matters, so you are led by these numbers.
              24. Simargl
                Simargl 26 February 2021 13: 46
                -1
                Quote: ccsr
                You don't understand anything
                I already understood everything: firstly, you do not know how the mirror is arranged, and secondly, you do not understand how a slit structure can influence (it is worse than a solid one, creating swirls), you have come up with some kind of game, calling it perforated, and thirdly, You are rubbish with understanding the efficiency coefficient, you are confused about "readings" ... in short: do not write more about telescopes, especially radio - this is not yours, especially when you are not trying to improve knowledge.

                Quote: ccsr
                And on a long exposure - well, well, you are still that "photographer" ...
                Well, I wouldn’t take pictures of the stars and the moon without a tracking mechanism on a tripod, but everyday photography is fine. The composition is even more accurate than Armstrong's. But you keep pulling the owl to the moon: you succeed. Lubricate.

                Quote: ccsr
                And what's on the left-hand holder:
                Houston! We have a problem: there is not a single photo where this stray is present in the frame on the moon. They hide everything from us!

                Quote: ccsr
                The viewfinder was of a completely different design.
                Let me tell you: the photo is not a viewfinder.

                Quote: ccsr
                Yes, this is a common practice, when some products are subjected to additional tests, several units are purchased and, in general, all costs are then transferred to the samples transferred to the customer.
                Those. have they passed the tests? Or not?
              25. ccsr
                ccsr 26 February 2021 19: 43
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                First of all, you don't know how the mirror works,

                I had to be on the surface, unlike you. We had several of them, including under radio-transparent spheres.
                Quote: Simargl
                came up with some kind of game, calling it perforated,

                These are wild ideas about radio telescopes in you:
                For these purposes, the world's largest radio telescope was built. The diameter of the plate is 304,8 meters.
                The depth of the dish (the scientific reflector mirror) is 50,9 meters, the total area is 73000 m2. It is made of 38778 perforated (perforated) aluminum plates, laid on a mesh of steel cables.

                Quote: Simargl
                Well, I wouldn’t take pictures of the stars and the moon without a tracking mechanism on a tripod, but everyday photography is fine.

                Well, stop lying, because lubrication from the trembling of outstretched arms will appear even at one sixtieth.
                Quote: Simargl
                Houston! We have a problem: there is not a single photo where this stray is present in the frame on the moon. They hide everything from us!

                You have a problem - this American camera was created after the program of flights to the moon ended.
                Quote: Simargl
                Let me tell you: the photo is not a viewfinder.

                The photo shows a device that allows you to do without the viewfinder of the device when photographing from a spacesuit. It essentially replaces the viewfinder for the astronaut, no matter how hard you try to speculate on this name, but the essence of the device is the same as that of the viewfinder.
                Quote: Simargl
                Those. have they passed the tests? Or not?

                You are still that eccentric, but I will try to explain how it happens. For testing according to customer requirements, they purchase a batch of serial products, modify them and partly use them for verification in all parameters. Some of the products are destroyed during such tests or lose their characteristics. After such tests, a conclusion is made for the entire batch, and those that have not been tested are transferred to the customer, but their price takes into account all purchased for testing, and the cost of the tests themselves. This is why this price is obtained.
              26. Simargl
                Simargl 26 February 2021 20: 46
                0
                Quote: ccsr
                We had several of them, including under radio-transparent spheres.
                Under the spheres - strongly perforated?
                Green Bank - what about the perforations? And he, by the way, has a utilization rate of almost 100%.

                Quote: ccsr
                These are wild ideas about radio telescopes in you:
                I'll try to make excuses: Uchi got into his head ...

                Quote: ccsr
                Well, stop lying, because lubrication from the trembling of outstretched arms will appear even at one sixtieth.
                Here you just need to not wave the camera like a lightsaber. And yes: now 99% of shots are taken hand-held, and not through the viewfinder attached to the forehead. The people don't complain.
                They don't always look at the screen ...

                Quote: ccsr
                The photo shows a device that allows you to do without the viewfinder of the device when photographing from a spacesuit.
                What's the difference? A-11 - A-17 did not use them.
                So ...
                Quote: ccsr
                Your problem is this American the camera was created after how the program of flights to the moon ended.


                Quote: ccsr
                That's why this price turns out.
                The question is: has the camera passed the tests?
              27. ccsr
                ccsr 26 February 2021 21: 46
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                Under the spheres - strongly perforated?

                No, a solid mirror - the dome just ensured operation in both strong winds and other precipitation, which means that the antenna itself and the mechanisms could be made lightweight.
                Quote: Simargl
                Green Bank - what about the perforations?

                I do not know, he did not participate in the lunar epic, I was not interested in him. By the way, he did not work on centimeter waves, and as far as I understood, he has a very low turning speed, in contrast to communication antennas.
                The minimum working wavelength is 6 mm.


                Quote: Simargl
                And yes: now 99% of shots are taken hand-held, and not through the viewfinder attached to the forehead.

                So this was not the case when landing on the moon - do not wag so primitively. By the way, I shoot with Mark-2 only through the viewfinder, unlike my other cameras, which do not have a viewfinder.
                Quote: Simargl
                The question is: has the camera passed the tests?

                I do not know what test program the customer approved. If they initially knew that it would be a scam, then they could have condescending to such tests.
              28. Simargl
                Simargl 27 February 2021 05: 46
                0
                Quote: ccsr
                and with other precipitation
                The wind load has nothing to do with it.

                Quote: ccsr
                By the way, he didn't work on centimeter waves
                More attentively:
                The Green Bank Telescope operates in the wavelength range from meter to millimeter. The collector zone with a diameter of 100 meters, open aperture and good surface accuracy provide excellent sensitivity over the entire operating range of the telescope 0,1–116 GHz.
                True, the lower limit is somewhere around 0,26 GHz.
                And so - yes: meter, usually unrealistically large and look like Ooty (ORT).
              29. ccsr
                ccsr 27 February 2021 10: 35
                0
                Quote: Simargl
                The wind load has nothing to do with it.

                You are just an amateur in this matter, I have known this for a long time. Combat duty sometimes had to be terminated when, due to weather conditions, it was necessary to fix the antenna in the safest position, if it was without a radio-transparent dome.
                Quote: Simargl
                The Green Bank Telescope operates in the wavelength range from meter to millimeter.

                So it does not work for communication systems - it is too expensive a structure, and it is used in radio astronomy. Well, you cannot hammer nails with a microscope, especially since the Americans did not even assume this when flying to the moon, calculating a multifunctional communication system.
            2. Simargl
              Simargl 27 February 2021 05: 54
              +1
              Quote: ccsr
              So it was not during the landing on the moon
              So was there a landing ?!
              They removed it from the chest strap, which is about the same as now almost all over the world with policemen - the chest camera.

              Quote: ccsr
              I do not know what test program the customer approved.
              I will tell you: for operating conditions. It's IP70, I guess. And I know there is only 6 in the table.

              Quote: ccsr
              If they initially knew that it would be a scam, then they could have condescending to such tests.
              Camera Requirements: Take up to 600 shots in dusty conditions.
            3. ccsr
              ccsr 27 February 2021 10: 43
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              So was there a landing ?!

              I think there was a lunar module landing without astronauts.
              Quote: Simargl
              .Approximately the same as now almost all over the world with policemen - a chest camera.

              Well, do not fantasize, because firstly it is filmed on a digital matrix, and secondly, the linear distance from the attachment point to the optical lenses is completely different, which means there will be less vibrations and there will be less smearing.
              Quote: Simargl
              I will tell you: for operating conditions. It's IP70, I guess.

              Were you admitted to this program to "prompt" me? Well, stop lying, tired of their primitivism ...
              Quote: Simargl
              Camera Requirements: Take up to 600 shots in dusty conditions.

              This does not mean anything - neither about the tests themselves, nor about the fact that they were successful, nor about how hermetically sealed the apparatus itself was and what the pictures were. In general, so, the usual dummy from the apologists of disembarkation, nasarogs often use this technique.
            4. Simargl
              Simargl 27 February 2021 12: 06
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              You are just an amateur in this matter, I have known this for a long time.
              I already understood that I was an amateur.

              Quote: ccsr
              Combat duty sometimes had to be stopped when, due to weather conditions, it was necessary to fix the antenna in the safest position,
              Up? And what about the small perforation to the wind, which is for draining the water?

              Quote: ccsr
              Well, you cannot hammer nails with a microscope, especially since the Americans did not even assume this when flying to the moon, calculating a multifunctional communication system.
              What was not supposed then? No feedback was expected during the transmission of the TV signal! If you only need a reception - the telescope is 100% suitable !!!

              Quote: ccsr
              I think there was a lunar module landing without astronauts.
              Something I'm confused ...
              Quote: ccsr
              This was not the case with disembarkation to the moon
              do not wag so primitively.

              Quote: ccsr
              Were you admitted to this program to "prompt" me?
              Common sense is not enough?
              Quote: ccsr
              Well, stop lying, tired of their primitivism ...
              Where am I lying? The first number in IP is the level of dust protection, IP6x is full protection against dust, the second number in IP is the level of protection against moisture, there is no moisture there, so the minimum will do.

              Quote: ccsr
              This does not mean anything - neither about the tests themselves, nor about the fact that they were successful, nor about how hermetically sealed the apparatus itself was and what the pictures were.
              Я suggestedthat the sufficient requirements are exactly that: up to 600 images in a dusty moon.

              Quote: ccsr
              In general, so, the usual dummy from the apologists of the landing
              Something I do not understand: the "apologists" provide documents, artifacts, refute the adherents of the lunar conspiracy at the children's level, but the conspiracy theorists are still true ?! Excuse me: on what basis? If you really want to, you can explore the camera that was returned to Earth: not so long ago it was sold for 660 euros. Try to negotiate.
              Although what am I talking about?
            5. ccsr
              ccsr 27 February 2021 13: 59
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              Up? And what about the small perforation to the wind, which is for draining the water?

              So perforated antennas have different hole diameters - you probably don't know.
              Quote: Simargl
              No feedback was expected during the transmission of the TV signal! If you only need a reception - the telescope is 100% suitable !!!

              There are very few of them, and interference and atmospheric cataclysms can lead to loss of communication with spaceships. That is why for communication systems it is necessary to use as many antennas of a smaller diameter in different places as possible, so as not to lose communication in any situations. Radio telescopes do not guarantee this.
              Quote: Simargl
              Something I'm confused ...

              Is it difficult for you to imagine how our lunar rover was landed?
              Quote: Simargl
              Where am I lying? The first digit in IP is the level of dust protection, IP6x is full protection against dust,

              You do not give our analogue, and what they mean by this, you do not seem to know yourself. How do you understand complete protection against dust, if, for example, it can increase electrostatic voltage or damage the lens surface?
              Quote: Simargl
              I assumed

              You are not the first who convinces me to believe in your assumptions - it is better to support your arguments with facts, or at least with common sense.
              Quote: Simargl
              Something I do not understand: the "apologists" provide documents, artifacts, refute the adherents of the lunar conspiracy at the children's level, but the conspiracy theorists are still true ?!

              Here are eyewitness accounts of the first lunar broadcast - I just laughed when I read all this nonsense for the profane, which the Americans themselves posted:
              The best picture was in Parks and so the next 2,5 hours broadcast to the whole world went from there.
              But then the weather changed. “The storm front passed through us and took us by surprise. У
              many had their hair on end. The alarm rang, the telescope control tower trembled. The wind speed exceeded all permissible safe limits. "

              Dr. Boltom decided to continue receiving the signal from the moon at all costs.
              Mr. Mason remained in control of the 1000-ton saucer, which was in the working position - the most vulnerable position during the storm. “We could only hope that the plate would not fall on our heads,” he says.
              Mr. Cooke watched the picture on the monitor screen. When Armstrong stepped onto the lunar surface, the American engineers working in the room were laconic: "Well, how are you, huh?" - said one of them.
              After all, Cook went outside and looked up. "The moon was still in the sky and I thought, God, there are people there and we are helping them to do their job."

              Continue to believe in this whim - a fair wind ...
              Quote: Simargl
              Although what am I talking about?

              Yes, nothing is your verbiage - no one has yet proven that American astronauts have set foot on the moon, despite the fact that 50 years have passed. How does this resemble a scam with the primacy of reaching the North Pole.
            6. Simargl
              Simargl 27 February 2021 20: 39
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              So perforated antennas have different hole diameters - you probably don't know.
              The question is the same: what does the wind have to do with it?

              Quote: ccsr
              There are very few of them, and interference and atmospheric cataclysms can lead to loss of communication with spaceships.
              We received telemetry, communicated with the crew through the 9th antenna. This has already been discussed. Don't you remember?

              Quote: ccsr
              Radio telescopes do not guarantee this.
              But even there were three of them at the reception.

              Quote: ccsr
              Is it difficult for you to imagine how our lunar rover was landed?
              So Lunokhod planted? He didn't roll out ?! Solid conspiracy ...

              Quote: ccsr
              Here are eyewitness accounts of the first lunar broadcast
              It's not easy to find. Secret links? However, I am also in shock: the "certificate" says that the signal was received even after 2,5 hours ... but why - no one said: I repeated about telemetry more than once, and the exit lasted those same 2,5 hours.
              Well, here it is:
              Quote: ccsr
              After all, Cook went outside and looked up. "The moon was still in the sky and I thought, God, there are people there and we are helping them to do their job."
              ... just that the control tower almost fell, and then ...

              Quote: ccsr
              How do you understand complete protection against dust, if, for example, it can increase electrostatic voltage or damage the lens surface?
              You still read what it is. But don't worry: IP70 is not needed there. Even IP60. You can get by with IP40.
              Harm the lens surface? Yes, spit on him: he shot his 2,5 hours and was thrown away.

              Quote: ccsr
              You do not give our analogue, and what they mean by this, you do not seem to know yourself.
              You will not believe: spit, as I understand it. Especially after 50 years. They gave a technical assignment, it was completed.

              Quote: ccsr
              Yes, nothing is your verbiage - no one has yet proven that American astronauts have set foot on the moon, despite the fact that 50 years have passed.
              Snapshots, video, audio, artifacts against verbiage and easily (well, it's not easy to get to the ground - I agree) refuted conclusions ...
              However, so many feces have already been poured on these flights that it is no longer possible to go online for official information.
            7. ccsr
              ccsr 28 February 2021 11: 26
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              The question is the same: what does the wind have to do with it?

              The antenna sparseness from the holes becomes less.

              Quote: Simargl
              We received telemetry, communicated with the crew through the 9th antenna. This has already been discussed. Don't you remember?

              In the near zone - read Shuneiko, or you cannot master which antennas were used at different distances?

              Quote: Simargl
              So the Lunokhod was landed? He didn't roll out ?! Solid conspiracy ...

              As an educational program:
              Lunokhod-1 left the platform and began its work. With a mass of 756 kg, the device moved at a speed of about 2 kilometers per hour.
              The lunar rover landed together with the platform.

              Quote: Simargl
              But don't worry: IP70 is not needed there. Even IP60. You can get by with IP40.

              Your verbiage is not supported by anything - I'm sure you yourself don't know a fig what is hidden behind these designations.
              Quote: Simargl
              Harm the lens surface? Yes, spit on him: he shot his 2,5 hours and was thrown away.

              Yes, he could be in the dust during this time - look at the dusty space suits of astronauts.
              Quote: Simargl
              You will not believe: spit, as I understand it. Especially after 50 years. They gave a technical assignment, it was completed.

              This is the position of all nasarogs - the main thing that the Americans said, and their own mind to understand that they were lying, they lack.
              Quote: Simargl
              However, so many feces have already been poured on these flights that it is no longer possible to go online for official information.

              Here's the official information:
              "All government agencies sometimes lie, but HACA is the only
              of all the agencies I know that do this
              regularly."

              George E. Kivoort, Presidential Counselor, Reygan,
              Director of Politics Development in the field of science and technology,
              from the witness testimony in Kongress, March 14, 1985
              It was not me who said this and not our media - this is the opinion of a US government official testifying under oath.
              By the way, you somehow "did not notice" the description of receiving a signal from the Moon during a storm, apparently this is not important for you. Although I can argue that in a few more hours, only according to the forecast, any work at such facilities immediately stops - this is too expensive a structure and the consequences are unpredictable.
            8. Simargl
              Simargl 28 February 2021 14: 32
              -1
              Quote: ccsr
              The antenna sparseness from the holes becomes less.
              "Holes" should be more than 50% in area ... I will not say for sure, but there is a tricky relationship: sometimes it turns out that the wind pressure is higher.


              Quote: ccsr
              As an educational program:
              Lunokhod-1 left the platform and began its work. With a mass of 756 kg, the device moved at a speed of about 2 kilometers per hour.
              Where is the word landing here?
              Quote: ccsr
              The lunar rover landed together with the platform.
              So moved out or landed?
              Quote: ccsr
              I'm sure you don't even know what lies behind these designations.
              Make a mistake - your right.

              Quote: ccsr
              Yes, he could be in the dust during this time - look at the dusty space suits of astronauts.
              I'm sure I did. However, the spacesuit, or rather, its shell, is an ordinary rag (the material is just not very ordinary - quartz fiber with Teflon).

              Quote: ccsr
              and their own mind to understand that they have lied, they do not have enough.
              Provide arguments that they were lying. While you are lying, in fact.

              Quote: ccsr
              George E. Keevoort, President Reigan's night advisor
              The problem is that there is no such position. Reagan's advisor was Edwin Meese.
              Trump, for example, also had a fake "science advisor," a Yale professor, David Gelentner.
              Those. You lied again. On purpose or out of ignorance?
            9. ccsr
              ccsr 28 February 2021 14: 45
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              "Holes" must be larger than 50% in area.

              Each radio astronomy antenna is unique in itself and is calculated taking into account many parameters, including location. Coupled parabolic antennas can be made according to standard designs. So your 50% does not say anything - sometimes the holes occupy only part of the antenna.
              Quote: Simargl
              Where is the word landing here?

              And do you think the platform teleported from Baikonur without landing?
              Quote: Simargl
              Provide arguments that they were lying.

              I have presented them to you, and it is not my fault that you cannot understand them.

              Quote: Simargl
              The problem is that there is no such position. Reagan's advisor was Edwin Meese.
              Trump, for example, also had a fake "science advisor," a Yale professor, David Gelentner.
              Those. You lied again. On purpose or out of ignorance?

              Are you really so illiterate that you cannot find even the simplest information?
              Since 1968, Keeworth has worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory, located in New Mexico and engaged in weapons development. In 1968 he became a member of the group of scientists engaged in neutron physics, in 1973 - the assistant to the leader of the group, and in 1974 - the leader. In 1978, he was first appointed head of the department of alternative physics, and then head of the department of physics, and in 1980-1981, concurrently, he was head of the department of laser nuclear fusion [2] [3] [4].
              In May 1981, Keeworth took over as Scientific Adviser to US President Ronald Reagan, and in the Presidential Administration as Head of the Science and Technology Policy Department.

              As for my text, it is taken from a book published in the USA - "Dark Mission. The Secret History of NASA" by R. Hoagland, M. Bar. So if something is wrongly translated during the translation, the essence of this does not change - Keeworth was an adviser on scientific issues. You can refute the documentary, or, as always, blah-blah-blah ...
            10. Simargl
              Simargl 28 February 2021 17: 16
              0
              And do you think the platform teleported from Baikonur without landing?
              Quote: ccsr
              And do you think the platform teleported from Baikonur without landing?
              How is it different? But the Lunokhod moved out. On their own.

              Quote: ccsr
              I have presented them to you, and it is not my fault that you cannot understand them.
              A set of fakes?

              Quote: ccsr
              Are you really so illiterate that you cannot find even the simplest information?
              What kind of information? George A. Keyworth II was Director of Science and Technology Policy, this Director among the people they call him an "adviser," but he is not, and during Reagan's tenure, the administration was not subordinate to the president.
              In any case, he did not utter words similar to those attributed (or distorted) to Gelentner. Rosstat is the most honest office.
              I propose to systematize your fakes "vs".
            11. ccsr
              ccsr 28 February 2021 18: 18
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              How is it different? But the Lunokhod moved out. On their own.

              And what does that change?
              Quote: Simargl
              A set of fakes?

              For the illiterate, this data will always be a set of fakes.
              Quote: Simargl
              this director is popularly called an "adviser", but he is not, and during Reagan's tenure, the administration was not subordinate to the president.

              You can refute the book of the authors I have indicated - I did not add anything on my own.
              Even to bring them to trial for defamation of Keeworth, I have no objection.
              Quote: Simargl
              In any case, he did not utter words similar to those attributed (or distorted) to Gelentner. Rosstat is the most honest office.

              This is a reference to American authors, not to Wikipedia, and I have not heard that they were brought to trial for libel. Enlighten if this is not the case.
              Quote: Simargl
              I propose to systematize your fakes "against".

              So do it yourself in order to understand at least something why Americans are considered liars about their landing. Here's a starting point:
              «Fortunately, the original SSTV signal was recorded, using video technology that would later find use in Betamax and VHS tape recorders in the 80s. Alas, when a group of enthusiasts, which included some of the engineers from the Goldstone station and from the Australian tracking stations, tried to find the original SSTV tapes, it turned out that they were missing. For several years they stubbornly searched for them, but found nothing.
              Certain formalities were required for the tapes to be delivered to the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in Greenbelt, Maryland. In 1970, the records were transferred to the US National Archives in the collection number 69A4099. By 1984, all but two of the more than 700 boxes of Apollo magnetic recordings held in the fund had been returned to Goddard at the request of the center itself for "permanent storage." Goddard has no box receipt records. In fact, all the SSTV tapes sent to Goddard were lost and to this day none of them have been found. " (p.533)

              "Dark Mission. NASA's Secret History."
              R. Hoagland, M. Bara
              Try to call it a fake, and bring the authors to a US court for libel. NASA did not do this, and did not present the tapes for refutation.
            12. Simargl
              Simargl 28 February 2021 20: 08
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              And what does that change?
              Much. You talked about the topic, where the astronauts landed (in your opinion), then they did not land.

              Quote: ccsr
              For the illiterate, this data will always be a set of fakes.
              Only yours fakes the "cons" are quite simple to refute. You have blabbed most of the arguments. Naturally, you do not consider this as an argument.

              Quote: ccsr
              You can refute the book of the authors I have indicated - I did not add anything on my own.
              What for? You didn’t bring anything in support of your fakes from Keeworth.

              Quote: ccsr
              and the fact that they were brought to trial for libel, I have not heard.
              I can't say for sure, but the queue for the astronaut corps is about 20 times longer than for the cosmonaut corps.
              There will be problems with the recruitment - there will be courts about a tarnished reputation. They don't need it yet.

              Quote: ccsr
              So do it yourself in order to understand at least something why Americans are considered liars about their landing.
              I have already said that the vast majority of arguments from fans of alternative history are broken on the school curriculum.

              Quote: ccsr
              Here's a starting point:
              “Fortunately, the original SSTV signal was recorded using video technology that would later find its way into Betamax and VHS tape recorders in the 80s.
              Here in more detail, please: everywhere it is written that the recording was carried out on a 14-track reel-to-reel tape recorder, and you mention the progressive inclined line technology.

              Quote: ccsr
              Try to call it fake and bring the authors to a US court for libel.
              What to do with you? Where did I claim I didn't lose anything?
            13. ccsr
              ccsr 1 March 2021 11: 55
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              Much. You talked about the topic, where the astronauts landed (in your opinion), then they did not land.

              As I understand it, you do not understand at all what it is about, and I will try to explain to you one last time. I do not believe that American astronauts set foot on the lunar surface. And at the same time, I admit that their lunar modules, WITHOUT A CREW, could land on the moon, just like our lunar rovers did. What is not clear to you here?
              Quote: Simargl
              I have already said that the vast majority of arguments from fans of alternative history are broken on the school curriculum.

              You could not even justify why the Hasselblads were without thermal containers, although all current cameras must use them even in low-earth orbit. It looks like you even didn’t understand the course of school physics if you don’t know the peculiarities of heat removal in vacuum.
              Quote: Simargl
              and you mention progressive inclined line technology.

              I do not mention this, but the American specialists who worked at NASA reported this:
              “In the middle of 2006, the national media published the story of the existence of high quality television recordings of Apollo 11 that were believed to be lost (169). As it turned out, the broadcast on TV of the historic first landing was much worse than the quality in which the signal was transmitted from the moon. The television image was sent through an antenna mounted on top of the lunar module to two tracking stations on Earth: Goldstone in California and Honeysuckle Grick and Parkers in Australia. This original signal was transmitted in a format called Slow Scan TeleVision, or SSTV, which was a slow scan television. The camera, brought to the surface of the Moon, gave 320 lines at 10 frames per second (hence the name "low-frame slow scan") in black and white. Although it was still lower than the standard broadcast quality of the time (525 lines at 30 frames per second), the original SSTV signal was orders of magnitude better than what was eventually shown to the Americans on June 20, 1969.
              Since the SSTV signal could not be directly transmitted for broadcast on television, the American Broadcasting Corporation had to develop a scan converter to ensure that the signal was delivered to viewers in "real time". However, this converter had a number of limitations and as a result, the broadcast signal had only 262,5 vertical lines, almost half the size of the standard TV signal and kinescope of televisions of the 60s.
              As a result, on July 20, 1069, when Neil Armstrong stepped onto the lunar surface, we all saw a dark transparent picture. Polaroid pictures taken with
              SSTV monitors in Australia (the Honeysuckle Grick signal was used by NASA to broadcast “one small step” to American television audiences) showed how much the SSTV signal was better than the converted image seen by the public (Figure E-1). "
              (p.532)

              "Dark Mission. NASA's Secret History."
              R. Hoagland, M. Bara
            14. Simargl
              Simargl 1 March 2021 17: 24
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              As I understand it, you do not understand at all what this is about
              I just don’t understand whether you believe or don’t believe. I prefer to trust until overwhelming evidence to the contrary emerges. As I already said, 99% (++) of all "proofs" are broken about the knowledge of a more or less literate student.

              Quote: ccsr
              I do not believe that American astronauts have set foot on the lunar surface.
              You can believe or not believe in God, but here facts and trust are important. There is no reason to trust opponents due to the inconsistency of the arguments. 100% of the arguments are untenable. I wrote about 99% of them above.

              Quote: ccsr
              What is not clear to you here?
              Movie-photo-video-audio artifacts ... where to put them. Pure conclusions cannot be attached to the "case".

              Quote: ccsr
              You could not even explain why the Hasselblads were without thermal containers
              I asked leading questions.
              Again:
              1 - to what temperature will the device be warmed up in the thermal container?
              2 - why do we need this thermal container, after having dealt with question # 1?
              3 - NASA claims the cameras did not warm up to more than 38C.
              4 - if you want to object, then specify how long the surface of the moon heats up to the maximum temperature?

              Quote: ccsr
              It looks like you even didn’t understand the course of school physics if you don’t know the peculiarities of heat removal in vacuum.
              This is already a little more than a school physics course.
              5 - Cameras had two heat dissipation paths. What is the second?

              Quote: ccsr
              I do not mention this, but the American specialists who worked at NASA reported this:
              You are hiding something! Where does this text mention something about slanted notation?


              Too lazy to look in garbage the internet that is flooded conspiracy theorists supporters of the lunar conspiracy ...
              It was like this: SSTV was recorded on tape with a longitudinal recording (a reel was enough for 15 minutes, that's about 300 yards of tape).
              Then it was played back from this tape and rewritten to a disk (I don't know what was called - a synchronizer?) Device, on which the signal was brought in accordance with NTSC, while the lines and quality were lost (the signal was recorded on the disk cyclically, and the analog signal was not contributes to the preservation of quality), all this was reproduced on a special monitor, from which they were reshomed with a special camera (exactly the one that reproduced films from the tape on air).
              I said:
              Quote: Simargl
              It's all simple now, but then you had to dodge.


              Delirium turns out: I almost quoted half of the text ...
              The proposal for systematization is valid.
            15. ccsr
              ccsr 1 March 2021 19: 00
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              3 - NASA claims the cameras did not warm up to more than 38C.

              Yesterday, our cosmonaut from the ISS specifically said in an interview that a spacesuit in a near-earth orbit in one orbit heats up to + 130C and cools down to -130C, and this is just 1,5 hours of flight, i.e. in just 45 minutes, any object is heated from 0 to +130 C.
              Quote: Simargl
              5 - Cameras had two heat dissipation paths. What is the second?

              I don't know what the second one was - can you tell me?
              Quote: Simargl
              The proposal for systematization is valid.

              I have another suggestion - first study the materials of the lunar landing so that you can have a substantive conversation with you.
              Quote: Simargl
              I said:

              Better study what the Americans said about this:
              Max Fadgett, the highly respected designer of the Mercury capsule at NASA, was beside himself that most of the photographs and all footage from the lunar surface will be black and white. As stated in Chariots for Apollo, NASA's official Apollo mission story:
              “The fadget was terribly upset that all the televisions and most Apollo 11 photos would be black and white. He was outraged that the culmination of the largest-scale US space program "would be recorded in such a squalid way.".
              His arguments were based on the fact that the color camera was successfully tested on the Apollo 10. Here one could argue that, having only one mission behind, the color camera was too risky for shooting the lunar surface.
              However, the black-and-white SSTV camera was also tested ONCE ONCE. ”
              Both systems have not been tested in lunar conditions.
              (p.534)

              Now, explain clearly why you tried to avoid high-quality shooting from the Moon, and even a poor signal conversion was invented when all this could be shown live on television. I think that this was done with only one purpose - to avoid exposure of falsification of filming.
            16. Simargl
              Simargl 1 March 2021 20: 42
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              Yesterday, our cosmonaut from the ISS specifically said in an interview
              Can you link to this interview?

              Quote: ccsr
              in one turn it heats up to + 130C and cools down to -130C
              Is it all straight? I missed something in the physics of the process.
              I repeat the question:
              Quote: Simargl
              1 - to what temperature will the device be warmed up in the thermal container?
              And why is it needed at all?
              I give a hint: to isolate from radiation, use a "golden grain".
              One more thing: remember how a thermos works.

              Quote: ccsr
              those. in just 45 minutes, any object is heated from 0 to +130 C.
              There is a problem here: what to do with the whole station? I suggest: for cooling, the substance is not discarded, but with excess - about 70 kW is available.

              Quote: ccsr
              I don't know what the second one was - can you tell me?
              I give you a hint: the other side of the moon.

              Quote: ccsr
              I have another suggestion - first study the materials of the lunar landing so that you can have a substantive conversation with you.
              Are you laughing
              Firstly, it is impossible: a lot, it is stupid, you still will not accept.
              Secondly, why? The main points are already known. Details are needed to show how people are deluded.

              Quote: ccsr
              Better study what the Americans said about this:

              Quote: ccsr
              was furious that most of the photographs and all footage from the lunar surface would be black and white
              Well, we have corrected: A15 / 16/17 videos are colored, almost all photos have been colored.

              Quote: ccsr
              Now, explain clearly why you tried to avoid high-quality photography from the Moon.
              Is it bandwidth and power?
              Even if the b / w signal of 320 lines, 10 fps, 32 shades of gray was poor - what would happen to the color? A guarantee of a poor b / w or a breakdown of color? A tit in your hands - no?

              Quote: ccsr
              and even a miserable signal conversion was invented when all this could be demonstrated live on television
              AS?! You live in a digital age where you can change the format on the fly. And I remember what dances with a tambourine were in the early 90s, when they brought a cassette with NTSC video!
              It was easier to re-shoot everything on film (I'm talking about Apollo) and then work with the film (according to the standard, above-described scheme), but I wanted everything at once, but it turned out as always.

              Quote: ccsr
              I think that this was done with only one purpose - to avoid exposure of falsification of filming.
              Expose as much as you like! It is enough to find outright bloopers in the shooting.
              Only not such as to be easily disputed.
            17. ccsr
              ccsr 2 March 2021 12: 33
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              Can you link to this interview?

              I cannot provide a link to this interview with certainty, as did not attach any importance to it, and I do not even remember what channel it was, but it was a few days ago, if you wish, find it yourself. Here's for an educational program:
              In low-earth orbit, metal in direct sunlight warms up to 160 degrees Celsius. And in the shade, objects cool down to minus 100 ° C. Apart from reliable thermal insulation, space suits are not provided with a heating system AT ALL - there is only a very complex cooling system. Around the cosmonaut - emptiness, vacuum. The same vacuum that is used in thermoses is the best heat insulator. The heat generated inside the spacesuit by the astronaut has nowhere to "run away" - and, if it were not for the cooling system, it would have been cooked inside the spacesuit in 5-10 minutes. A spacesuit for work in open space with an automatic climate control system "Orlan MKS" has been developed in Russia.

              https://stihi.ru/2019/04/01/6083
              I hope I don't need to answer this stupid question:
              Quote: Simargl
              And why is it needed at all?


              Quote: Simargl
              It is enough to find outright bloopers in the shooting.

              Did you see them broadcast TV coverage from the rover as they moved? Already this alone was enough to understand what nonsense the Americans are pushing. So they exposed themselves a long time ago, and it's not my fault that you haven't grown up to that.
            18. Simargl
              Simargl 2 March 2021 13: 08
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              I cannot provide a link to this interview with certainty, as did not attach importance to it
              The problem is that I am asking leading questions in an attempt to awaken my opponent's understanding, but you are simply quoting and accusing me of ignorance.
              I will repeat the questions, the answers to which are important for understanding the physics of the process:

              Quote: Simargl
              1 - to what temperature will the device be warmed up in the thermal container?

              Quote: Simargl
              And why is it needed at all?
              This is me about the thermal container, or rather, about this "shirt".
              Quote: Simargl
              what about the whole station? I suggest: for cooling, the substance is not discarded, but with excess - about 70 kW is available.
              I'm talking about cooling, where there is "extra" (not only from the sun) power.

              Quote: ccsr
              I hope I don't need to answer this stupid question:
              Quote: Simargl
              And why is it needed at all?
              Don't know the answer? So say: I don't know. Now, if you think that I will write in response to nonsense, then we will figure it out.

              Quote: ccsr
              Did you see them broadcast TV coverage from the rover as they moved?
              Ssylochku.
            19. ccsr
              ccsr 2 March 2021 13: 51
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              Don't know the answer? So say: I don't know.

              I brought you photographs of cameras in containers - you apparently did not understand that this is a mandatory necessity, even in near-earth orbit. Let me remind you that cameras were placed in thermal containers back in the fifties, when our objects were filmed with the help of probes. If you cannot understand why this was done, then these are your problems.

              Quote: Simargl
              Ssylochku.

              Look for it yourself, it's posted on the net. I once discussed this episode at the "airbase", so I see no reason to explain something to the next ignorant.
            20. Simargl
              Simargl 2 March 2021 15: 21
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              I brought you photographs of cameras in containers - you apparently did not understand that this is a mandatory necessity, even in near-earth orbit.
              You have a "Carrot". Look at it and compare it with ... "Vigilant", or what ... Catch the difference?

              Quote: ccsr
              If you cannot understand why this was done, then these are your problems.
              It’s actually я asked the question. And, for understanding, he supplemented it with others.


              Quote: Simargl
              1 - to what temperature will the device be warmed up in the thermal container?
              2 - why is it needed (in light of the answer to the first question)?
              Don't you understand that these answers are related?
              What is the point of discussing with you if you, without answering the question directly, show unwillingness to discuss constructively?

              Well, they wrap spacesuits, ships, some things in a "shirt" ... but the Americans, for example (like ours) had a different concept, it is also used, if anything, at the same time - actively.
              If you know what I mean (how objects heat up and cool down in space), but keep quiet - how to understand this? Is your entire "house of cards" conspiracy thesis collapsing?
              What is the name of a mental disorder in which a person cannot answer a question directly? Or are you afraid that people will laugh out of your "knowledge"?

              Quote: ccsr
              Look for it yourself, it's posted on the net. I once discussed this episode at the "airbase"
              So what to work with then? Videos are a bunch. Miscellaneous. At the same time, the conspiracy is so dirty that it takes a long time to figure it out - it's easier to send a request to NASA and wait a long time.
              And then it turns out that "not that".

              Quote: ccsr
              I see no reason to explain something to the next ignorant
              Ignorant?
              Is it because I could not, through telepathy, find out what you are?
              Look what happens: You say that there is a certain video that proves everything, but I have to find it myself. Yes, but I have not seen such a video!
            21. ccsr
              ccsr 2 March 2021 17: 26
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              You have a "Carrot". Look at it and compare it with ... "Vigilant", or what ... Catch the difference?

              No, from the point of view of overheating, there is no difference - the emulsion will float on the film.
              Quote: Simargl
              1 - to what temperature will the device be warmed up in the thermal container?
              2 - why is it needed (in light of the answer to the first question)?
              Don't you understand that these answers are related?

              You do not seem to understand that the containers for thermal insulation can be different - it depends on how many hours the critical temperature will come.
              Quote: Simargl
              Well, they wrap spacesuits, ships, some things in a "shirt" ... but the Americans, for example (like ours), had a different concept,

              And what is this "concept" that refutes the laws of physics?
              Quote: Simargl
              So what to work with then? Videos are a bunch. Miscellaneous.

              With the video that was broadcast from the rover to the ground:
              In addition, NASA could track the movements of the lunar rover from Earth: a highly directional mesh parabolic antenna, as well as an omnidirectional antenna, were used for communication. A color television camera was installed on board and a 16mm movie camera, as well as a 70mm camera. The thermal protection system prevented high temperatures from affecting the equipment.

              At the same time, think about why the television camera had protection on the rover, but the cameras on the astronauts' chests did not have it.
              Quote: Simargl
              You say that there is a certain video that proves everything, but I have to find it myself. Yes, but I have not seen such a video!

              Write to NASA - there should be a video that was broadcast from the rover, and compare it with what the Americans showed us in the first landing.
            22. Simargl
              Simargl 2 March 2021 18: 20
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              No, in terms of overheating, there is no difference
              In terms of the intensity of heating and the final temperature (you know what does it depend on?)

              Quote: ccsr
              You don't seem to understand that thermal insulation containers can be different
              Did I say something about the heating rate?
              Do not know? Why are you talking again?

              Quote: ccsr
              And what is this "concept" that refutes the laws of physics?
              I do not know how in your alternate universe, but the reflection of radiation is used to this day. They chatted again. Or don't you know?

              Quote: ccsr
              With the video that was broadcast from the rover to the ground:
              I'm already starting to get tired ...


              Quote: ccsr
              At the same time, think about why the TV camera had protection on the rover
              The cameras on the chest are in the shade most of the time, and even they were brought into the module, and the camera is in the sun all the time, and they wanted to use it even after departure ... or is this not an argument?

              Quote: ccsr
              Write to NASA - there should be a video that was broadcast from the rover,
              So tell me what to ask, otherwise, in general terms, it is very convenient for you: you can "slide" at any time.
              However, as well as chatting.
              You play around, dodge, accuse of ignorance, but you do not want to answer a question that is not difficult. Why?
            23. ccsr
              ccsr 2 March 2021 20: 00
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              Did I say something about the heating rate?

              Do not wobble, you are constantly dodging when you cannot deny the fact that the equipment overheats under the influence of solar energy.
              Quote: Simargl
              I'm already starting to get tired ...

              Wiggle further - you will not lose anything. To make them completely exhausted, I recommend answering the questions that other authors who have studied photographs from the Moon are asking Americans:
              I must say that for all the critical remarks of "skeptics" (those who, for one reason or another, doubt that Americans visit the Moon), NASA remains silent, without commenting or explaining numerous contradictions to physical laws. In general, this is perhaps the only correct position for NASA. As has long been recommended to fools in Russia - "shut up, maybe you will pass for a clever one." But NASA is full of defenders among the "believers" in the fact that Neil Armstrong, Baz Aldrin and a dozen other American astronauts "trampled" on the moon.

              https://photo-vlad.livejournal.com/65083.html
              Quote: Simargl
              The cameras on the chest are in the shade most of the time,

              Lies - a lot of shots and videos of astronauts when the camera is under the sun's rays. The Americans did not have any devices that would regulate the temperature of the Hasselblads above +40 C.
              Quote: Simargl
              moreover, they were entered into the module

              5 minutes would have been enough for them to be in the sun for the metal case of the cassette to warm up above 70C, and then the film would start to deteriorate.
              Quote: Simargl
              You play around, dodge, accuse of ignorance, but you do not want to answer a question that is not difficult. Why?

              I answered all your questions, and you just do not want to read them - this is the tactic of all the creepers. I can’t help you with anything - there is an inadequate perception of other people's texts.
              Quote: Simargl
              So tell me what to ask, otherwise, in general terms, it is very convenient for you: you can "slide" at any time.

              Okay, ask NASA where the rover footprints are in their official photo:
            24. Simargl
              Simargl 2 March 2021 21: 45
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              Don't wag, you're constantly dodging
              So you wag.
              To minimize external heat transfer, all sections of the CC were insulated with the so-called screens with vacuum thermal insulation... The fact is that of all types of external heat transfer in orbit, under vacuum conditions, practically only radiant heat transfer (heating due to radiation from the Sun and the Earth and cooling due to radiation from the surface of the spacecraft itself) is important, which depends primarily on the so-called optical properties of the surface (the degree of her blackness).
              tech.wikireading.ru/13115
              How "black" were Hasselblad carcasses? In addition, they were in any case one side in the sun and the other in the shade. This is apart from the moments when they were completely shaded. So you need to think about how they did not freeze (for the gifted add: including), and not overheated!
              The problem is, to a greater extent, in uneven heating and "floating", at the same time, mates.
              And on your photo with astronaut In your opinion, an astronaut (how to call a non-Russian citizen delivered by the Russian spacecraft to the ISS?) it is black, receives energy from the sun, and the rest of the carcass is thermally insulated. But you will campaign for the electoral laws of physics, which can sometimes be violated.

              Quote: ccsr
              To make them completely exhausted, I recommend answering the questions that other authors who have studied photographs from the Moon are asking Americans:
              How many times will I repeat: 99% of all "accusations of falsification" breaks down on knowledge of physics within the framework of the school curriculum. And indeed:
              Quote: ccsr
              As has long been recommended to fools in Russia - "shut up, maybe you will pass for a clever one."
              to argue with an ignoramus is to be considered a fool of his level. Education should be engaged in education, not NASA or Roskosmos.

              Quote: ccsr
              Lies - a lot of shots and videos of astronauts when the camera is under the sun's rays.
              And how does this contradict my statement? An owl on the moon is bursting at the seams.

              Quote: ccsr
              The Americans did not have any devices that would regulate the Hasselblad temperature above +40 C.
              Have I argued otherwise? Have I argued like that? You are lying!

              Quote: ccsr
              I answered all your questions, and you just don't want to read them.
              Not a single question was answered! Everything that you "answered" can hardly be drawn as an indirect answer, because even the topic, often, does not concern.

              Quote: ccsr
              this is the tactic of all nasarogs
              Avoiding a direct answer is a tactic of the ignorant. Or if there is nothing to "cover".

              Quote: ccsr
              I can’t help you with anything - there is an inadequate perception of other people's texts.
              Should I tell you where and how you move away from answering questions?
              In fact, you have to retype everything.

              Quote: ccsr
              in their official photo
              I admit that the photo is official. However, the official photos have a number in the album. And the network address. And they have not a small resolution. If you do not have the original, number, or address of this photo, how can you accept it for consideration at all?

              Another question arose: if everything was forged, then why no conspiracy theorist, even on the basis of modern knowledge and equipment, could repeat what Kubrick is said to have done? Repeat at least one photo so that it looks similar (I'm talking about adequate, because you can bungle the light even now)!
            25. ccsr
              ccsr 3 March 2021 11: 13
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              the so-called screen-vacuum thermal insulation.

              Where is the Hasselblads?
              Quote: Simargl
              which depends primarily on the so-called optical properties of the surface (the degree of its blackness).

              Only the heating rate depends.
              Quote: Simargl
              The problem is, to a greater extent, in uneven heating and "floating", at the same time, mates.

              Those. you assume that one edge of the film from the illuminated side was heated to 70-90 C, and the other edge of the film could be at -70C. And after that, you think that the frames should have been obtained as at + 20C - well, well, you are still that dreamer ...
              Quote: Simargl
              Have I argued otherwise? Have I argued like that? You are lying!

              Ie, do you agree that the Hasselblad chamber could have been overheated, albeit on one side - or not? Otherwise, you are already wriggling so that it becomes funny to watch your attempts to get out.
              Quote: Simargl
              I admit that the photo is official.

              What do you mean if the photos are taken from the official NASA website? Study them carefully, and if you are smart enough, you will see what bloopers they have done:

              http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-85-11471.jpg
              http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-86-11603.jpg
              http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-85-11470.jpg
              http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-90-12218HR.jpg
              http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-90-12219HR.jpg
              http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-88-11901HR.jpg
            26. Simargl
              Simargl 3 March 2021 16: 37
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              Where is the Hasselblads?
              I do not understand the question. Is it required?

              Quote: ccsr
              Those. you assume that one edge of the film from the illuminated side was heated to 70-90 С
              This will be the case if the film is outside the casing, or in a plastic casing.
              Aluminum will be hard to overheat: it is, bastard, heat-conducting.

              Quote: ccsr
              And after that, you think that the frames should have been obtained as at + 20C - well, well, you are still that dreamer ...
              In general, I believe that if the film is kept under the sun, no photographs will work.

              Quote: ccsr
              Ie you agree that the Hasselblad chamber may have been overheated
              Subject to the conditions - yes, I could. Transfer?

              Quote: ccsr
              even if on the one hand - or not?
              It depends very much on the material of the case. Chugunina could overheat.
              But then the question arises: if you roughly understand how the camera works, why do you think that the film must suffer ?! The nearest place where the film touches the hottest part of the camera is the perforation. There is also a thrust plate (I will not look, as it is called), which presses and aligns the film "from the back", but it is on very thin springs. The plate itself could be made even of silver and equalize the temperature throughout the frame.
              Those.
              Quote: ccsr
              Those. you assume that one edge of the film from the illuminated side was heated to 70-90 C, and the other edge of the film could be at -70 C
              ... hardly such values, but even with a drop of 100-120C - the frame of the film for exposure was submitted with an equalized temperature and not overheated.

              Quote: ccsr
              Otherwise, you are already wriggling so that it becomes funny to watch your attempts to get out.
              GY ... what is the requirement? Create conditions for film advance and normal exposure. Don't give a damn about the motors - they can be made such that they will work even at -150 - + 300C.

              Quote: ccsr
              What do you mean you admit if the photos are taken from the official NASA website?
              Do you understand what's the matter? A lot of fakes are circulating on the network, recently they have become of better quality, therefore it is useful to consider the original source, and you, besides the words that it was taken from it, did not bother leaving any links.
              I had to look for it myself, I found it.

              Let's skip the assumption that the dynamic range, sharpness and resolution were not enough everywhere for the trail to be visible ...
              Let's say Kubrick was given the task of filming the "rover races" ... Do you really think that he would be driven to the site by a crane? What for?!
              By the way, I pointed to AS15-85-11411, too, there is no trace ... but on AS15-85-11413 - there is ... but these are three frames in a row!
              On the same AS15-85-11470, which is before AS15-85-11471, you can see the rim of the wheel track, if you deduce the curves ...
            27. ccsr
              ccsr 3 March 2021 19: 23
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              I do not understand the question. Is it required?

              For film spacecraft, yes.
              Quote: Simargl
              Aluminum will be hard to overheat: it is, bastard, heat-conducting.

              So he will heat the film due to thermal conductivity and radiation.
              Quote: Simargl
              but even with a drop of 100-120C - the frame of the film for exposure was supplied with an equalized temperature and not overheated.

              Was it found in the instructions of the device, were you present at the tests, or did they write it according to the Americans?
              Quote: Simargl
              Don't give a damn about the motors - they can be made such that they will work even at -150 - + 300C.

              The grease will run out and evaporate, settling on the film. And the camera's tolerances for normal operation are hardly designed for such temperature drops - I wrote to you for what temperatures the manufacturer guarantees the Hasselblads to work.

              Quote: Simargl
              Do you understand what's the matter? There are many fakes walking around the network, recently they have become of better quality, therefore it is useful to consider the original source,

              I have not heard that the official NASA website was faked.
              Quote: Simargl
              By the way, I pointed to AS15-85-11411, too, there is no trace ... but on AS15-85-11413 - there is ... but these are three frames in a row!

              And that didn't put you on your guard?
            28. Simargl
              Simargl 3 March 2021 20: 30
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              For film spacecraft, yes.
              Is this space said? Taking into account the fact that the cassette is disposable, the camera is for a maximum of 600 shots and 24 hours outside ...

              Quote: ccsr
              So he will heat the film due to thermal conductivity and radiation.
              For the same reason, the chamber will actively cool down, "due to thermal conductivity and radiation." Moreover, when it is in the sun, it will heat up on the one hand, cool down on the other, and only cool down in the shade.

              Quote: ccsr
              Was it found in the instructions of the device, were you present at the tests, or did they write it according to the Americans?
              What exactly? About the presence of a plate, or that it is "silver"? Even if it's just steel or aluminum, it is there.

              Quote: ccsr
              The grease will run out and evaporate, settling on the film.
              True? Consistent? Fish fat? Ali solidol? What kind of lubricant ?!
              And a lot of grease in the camera?

              Quote: ccsr
              I wrote to you for what temperatures the manufacturer guarantees the Hasselblads to work.
              Please show the manufacturer's specification for those supplied as for space. And for what they threw $ 120 (minimum)?

              Quote: ccsr
              I have not heard that the official NASA website was faked.
              Why are you distorting the meaning? You do not pull on NASA, like VO. And the link did not deign to provide initially.

              Quote: ccsr
              And that didn't put you on your guard?
              So I thought: why are the traces from the right wheel visible in the picture, but not from the left ... maybe outside the dynamic range? But no! It is there that they are. True, a little to the left. But it cannot be that he drove off not in his tracks! It was rearranged. wassat
              I said about the first shot: I drag the curves, but apart from the edge of the track nothing comes out, not even the unevenness of the ground. Usually - if the range is not enough. For example, if you take pictures of the forest and snow.

              Aren't you alarmed that there are no official fakes? Those. pictures, videos, performed in the style of the "lunar conspiracy"? Or am I not aware of something?
              And you are not alarmed by the fact that not a single film reaches the quality of even the video from the A-11?
            29. ccsr
              ccsr 3 March 2021 20: 54
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              Is this space said? Taking into account the fact that the cassette is disposable, the camera is for a maximum of 600 shots and 24 hours outside ...

              This is taken into account for any objects in space - even the batteries on the rover were protected from overheating by a screen.
              Quote: Simargl
              True? Consistent? Fish fat? Ali solidol? What kind of lubricant ?!
              And a lot of grease in the camera?

              Ask the developers about it. While it is known that it was used in some devices:
              Outside, the 500EL camera was also silver-plated so as not to overheat in the sun, and commonly used lubricants have either been replaced or canceled altogether, because in a vacuum they could condense on lenses, Réseau plates and film.

              Quote: Simargl
              And for what they threw $ 120 (minimum)?

              I have already answered this question - do you accidentally have sclerosis for individual texts?
              Quote: Simargl
              And the link did not deign to provide initially.

              I'm not so naive as to believe that you want to change your mind, even if I give a link or other facts - my experience with nasarogs taught me this. If you were really interested, you could easily find the place of its placement from the photo.
              Quote: Simargl
              And you are not alarmed by the fact that not a single film reaches the quality of even the video from the A-11?

              Another fact worries me - judging by the duration, some videos of the lunar expedition could have been made on airplanes that ensured weightlessness for a short time.
            30. Simargl
              Simargl 4 March 2021 06: 19
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              This is taken into account for any objects in space - even the batteries on the rover were protected from overheating by a screen.
              The rover was in the sun for several days in a row, and the cameras - for a maximum of 24 hours, but with interruptions.

              Quote: ccsr
              While it is known that it was used in some devices:
              The outside of the 500EL was also silver-plated to keep it from overheating in the sun, and commonly used lubricants were either replaced or canceled altogether, as they could condense on lenses, Réseau plates and film in a vacuum.
              Those. You can't even read what you find yourself?
              Outside, the 500EL camera was also silvered, so as not to overheat in the sun

              usually the lubricants used are either replaced by, or in general canceled
              Come on, tell us how you missed it or didn't understand it!
              But I'm already starting to jerk off, mentioning fish oil and grease.

              Quote: ccsr
              I have already answered this question
              You have spoken outright nonsense!
              How many cameras were purchased? Minimum 14, for missions A11 - A17, if you count two. Almost two million for testing ?! Are you out of your mind ?!

              Quote: ccsr
              I'm not naive enough to believe that you want to change your mind.
              You are naive: I could change my mind if I could find at least some inexplicable artifact. However, in no way.

              Quote: ccsr
              even if I give a link or other facts
              I found the photo itself. On the official site. I did the job for you.
              Quote: ccsr
              it was easy to find the place of its placement from the photo
              How? Considering that a sea of ​​fakes will fall out according to the "mold".

              Quote: ccsr
              Another fact worries me - judging by the duration, some videos of the lunar expedition could have been made on airplanes
              Tell the children about it. First, find out which aircraft were used to fly the Kepler parabola.
              Then it was about 15 seconds, in rather tight conditions.
              The surface of the moon cannot be modeled.
              In CC ... at least one video per minute (I will not search - now about 40 seconds, it seems) will vulgarize everything.
            31. ccsr
              ccsr 4 March 2021 12: 35
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              How many cameras were purchased? Minimum 14, for missions A11 - A17, if you count two. Almost two million for testing ?! Are you out of your mind ?!

              You are out of your mind, tk. you don’t know that a much larger number of cameras were purchased for testing, and they were not transferred for flight. The tests and refinement themselves also cost a lot of money, which is why such a cost came out.
              Quote: Simargl
              Then it was about 15 seconds, in rather tight conditions.

              That is why experts have paid attention to the length of some rollers.
              Quote: Simargl
              The surface of the moon cannot be modeled.

              What makes you think, especially for photography in the pavilion.
              Quote: Simargl
              Come on, tell us how you missed it or didn't understand it!

              Let you study something yourself, but I'm already fed up with the educational program. And it turns out that you have not seen photos of NASA on their website, and I was also to blame for this - well, well ..
              By the way, Musk screwed up again - the third accident in such a short time, and you tell me something about the events of fifty years ago. By the way, why was the American design of the lunar spacesuit abandoned when going into outer space, since it was so reliable that several flights went flawlessly, even without a toilet on board.
            32. Simargl
              Simargl 4 March 2021 17: 44
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              You are out of your mind, tk. don't know that a lot of cameras were purchased for testing
              Am I out of my mind?
              I repeat the question: at least 14, but rather at least 21 cameras participated in the flights (this is in addition to the A8 - A10, which were not on the moon, but these cameras were there). 14 x $ 130 = $ 000 (1 x $ 830 = $ 000), i.e. more than $ 21 million was spent on this photographic equipment. The cost of a carcass with a back and a lens is about $ 130 in the "civilian" version. Let $ 000 for an "even score".
              If you think that no design changes were made, then it turns out that the test cycle cost $ 120? What did they do with the cameras? Were you sent to the future

              Quote: ccsr
              That is why experts paid attention to the length some rollers.
              I repeat for those in the tank:
              Quote: Simargl
              In QC ... at least one video with a duration of minute (I will not search - now about 40 seconds, sort of) all vulgarize.


              Quote: ccsr
              What makes you think, especially for photography in the pavilion.
              Do you keep chatting?
              The only conclusive artifact is evidence. Others may be controversial.

              Quote: ccsr
              Let you study something yourself, but I'm already fed up with the educational program
              Just say: "I don't know"! You haven't gotten anything intelligible yet!

              Quote: ccsr
              And it turns out that you have not seen photos of NASA on their website, and I was also to blame for this - well, well ..
              Wait a minute! What are you accusing me of?
              From the first answers I said that you need to use the official materials and gave links. After that, you tell me that I have not seen the pictures? After that, in your photo, I said that you need a number to work with the original source, but you posted it only after I myself found this picture (yeah, despite the others), provided the numbers of several others.

              Quote: ccsr
              By the way, Musk screwed up again
              I don't give a damn about Musk's successes and failures! Returned stages have two tasks. Can you guess which ones?
              I wrote about them. And these tasks are performed by Musk.
              If this is you talking about Starship - it's all bullshit: these are experimental models.
              If about the Bottle - also garbage: he did the job, and the accident at the end is even good.
              I am surprised by your joy. For example, I am not happy about a neighbor's "fire" - I will even help extinguish it. I am glad when I am doing well.

              Quote: ccsr
              By the way, why was the American design of the lunar spacesuit abandoned during spacewalk since it was so reliable?
              They were versatile. And therefore - with a very short period of use for EVA. I think because they developed something better.

              Quote: ccsr
              that several flights were flawless
              Not in a row and, nevertheless, almost.

              Quote: ccsr
              even without a toilet on board
              Interestingly, many people there went to the bushes until the 70s. With jerks, oddly enough, we still have a better situation, and only 10 years ago they began to actively accustom us to houses made of matches.
              Find out how Z / K go to the toilet at the stage.
            33. ccsr
              ccsr 4 March 2021 18: 23
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              those. more than $ 2,5 million was spent on this photographic equipment.

              Yes, one hour of bench testing can cost tens of thousands of dollars if this requires creating critical situations in a deep vacuum.
              Quote: Simargl
              From the first answers I said that you need to use the official materials and gave links. After that, you tell me that I have not seen the pictures?

              Naturally, they didn’t see it, otherwise they wouldn’t bellow when they poked your nose into the pictures, where there are no traces of the rover, although they are clearly visible in other photographs.
              Quote: Simargl
              They were versatile.

              Lies - they were generally poorly worked out, which is why their design mistakes were immediately revealed when our cosmonauts began to work in outer space.
              By the way, why is the work in our and the American spacesuit on the ISS limited in time, but the Americans did not do this on the Moon - they were immortals?
              Quote: Simargl
              Interestingly, many of them used to go to the bushes there until the 70s.

              This is during a multi-hour flight or what?
            34. Simargl
              Simargl 4 March 2021 20: 29
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              Yes, one hour of bench testing can cost tens of thousands of dollars if this requires creating critical situations in a deep vacuum.
              Once they were purchased, did they pass the tests?

              Quote: ccsr
              Naturally, they did not see it, otherwise they would not hum when they poked your nose into the pictures
              Do not lie! You did not post a link to the source, but what VO shows can be any nonsense. I found the picture itself in the source without you, having reviewed a certain number.

              Quote: ccsr
              you have been poked into photographs where there are no rover tracks, although they are clearly visible in other photographs.
              So what? There are all indications that these are surface features and "overexposure" (the edge of the dynamic range of the film).

              Quote: ccsr
              Lies - they were generally poorly worked out, which is why their design mistakes were immediately revealed when our cosmonauts began to work in outer space.
              This is when our astronauts worked in the A7L ?! What nonsense ?!

              Quote: ccsr
              but on the moon the Americans did not do this - were they immortals?
              A7L - 6 hours + 30 minutes.
              A7LВ - 7 hours + 30 minutes.
              Yes, I agree: beyond 7,5 hours, only immortals.

              Quote: ccsr
              This is during a multi-hour flight or what?
              This is practically all my life.
              I now had to take care of a person, including helping with bowel movements.
              It’s harder for fighter pilots on the hauls now.
            35. ccsr
              ccsr 4 March 2021 21: 13
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              Once they were purchased, did they pass the tests?

              You do not seem to be in the subject at all how it's done. Hasselblads are civilian equipment for NORMAL working conditions, where even the overloads that are available on rocketry are not provided.
              Quote: Simargl
              Do not lie!

              I wasn’t lying when I told you this was an official NASA image, but you didn’t believe it because you’ve never seen them before. Anyone who is in the subject immediately understands where they came from.
              Quote: Simargl
              So what?

              So explain how it happened, and that's it.
              Quote: Simargl
              Yes, I agree: beyond 7,5 hours, only immortals.

              So they had a completely different design and protection than that of the astronauts' spacesuits, which already suggests that the Americans did not pay much attention to the safety of astronauts, especially since we also have an atmosphere up to 1000 km. Why did it happen?
              Quote: Simargl
              It’s harder for fighter pilots on the hauls now.

              Can you explain reasonably why you sent the rover to the moon, if every kilogram of weight is registered? Yes, it would be better to load extra fuel in case of unsuccessful docking, and not to engage in garbage in the form of trips for some unknown reason. By the way, more than fifty years later, Musk failed the landing with fuel residues. this is still a problem, but on the moon everything worked out dashingly. But the task is even more difficult to start with incomplete tanks - however, you hardly understand what is at stake.
              But if you are interested in this, then you will have more and more questions, so educate yourself.
            36. Simargl
              Simargl 4 March 2021 21: 51
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              Hasselblads are civilian equipment for NORMAL working conditions, where even the overloads that are available on rocketry are not provided.
              And what are the overloads there? Takeoff up to 4g. For almost any technique, this is within the limits of normal operation. Even the HDD heads don't fold.
              The sun is yes. But the cameras were painted with silver.
              Vacuum - yes. But they removed the excess lubricant, and where it was necessary, they dropped the silicone. Removed the rubber bands.

              Quote: ccsr
              I wasn’t lying when I told you this was an official NASA snapshot.
              What you have shown is a snapshot adapted by the VO site following a link from somewhere. It was necessary to give a link or a number immediately.

              Quote: ccsr
              So explain how it happened, and that's it.
              Strange ... explained twice ...
              By the way, this photo has a suspiciously low resolution www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a15/AS15-86-11603.jpg No traces are visible.
              And here ... www.flickr.com/photos/projectapolloarchive/21495828160/in/album-72157658635216160/ can be seen.
              While you're puffing up there - NASA is reacting and correcting! Need to faster!

              Quote: ccsr
              So they had a completely different design and protection was
              So what? How to check the work of a spacesuit in terrestrial conditions without bothering too much?

              Quote: ccsr
              which already suggests that the Americans did not pay much attention to the safety of astronauts
              Maybe that's why they changed the spacesuits when they had to use them for a long time?
              So in Sokol you can go into outer space ... not for long.

              Quote: ccsr
              Can you explain reasonably why you sent the rover to the moon, if every kilogram of weight is registered?
              The official version is not to mark time, but to drive away.
              Well, these are the Americans. What is an American without a horse?

              Quote: ccsr
              do not engage in garbage in the form of trips is unclear why.
              Why did Lunokhod move at all?

              Quote: ccsr
              By the way, more than fifty years later, Musk failed the landing with fuel residues. this is still a problem, but on the moon everything worked out dashingly.
              You need to explain that the configuration of the rocket, the atmosphere, the required accuracy of the landing - everything affects.

              Quote: ccsr
              But the task is even more difficult to start with incomplete tanks - however, you hardly understand what is at stake.
              Yes, please explain to me. How difficult it is to start with complete tanks?
              However, you hardly understand what is at stake. Don't write right away - be surprised.

              Quote: ccsr
              But if you are interested in this
              Enlighten you. Especially interesting is the secret why the tanks were not full.
            37. ccsr
              ccsr 5 March 2021 12: 47
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              The sun is yes. But the cameras were painted with silver.

              And do you believe that it saved you from overheating?
              Quote: Simargl
              It was necessary to give a link or a number immediately.

              Before you start arguing, you should at least study the lunar epic more broadly, and then you would have many questions not to me, but to the Americans.
              Quote: Simargl
              The official version is not to mark time, but to drive away.

              It is useless to drive away for 4 km of soil - this is generally a profanation from the point of view of scientific research, because if you take it in another area, then you need to do it much further.
              Quote: Simargl
              Why did Lunokhod move at all?

              He worked for a long time, and transmitted images to the ground, and his movement is due to the fact that you need to get as many images as possible from different angles.
              Quote: Simargl
              Yes, please explain to me. How difficult is it to start with full tanks?

              It is easier to start with full tanks - and why, dig in the literature yourself, then you will find out why.
              Quote: Simargl
              Especially interesting is the secret why the tanks were not full.

              There is no secret - the fuel was used during landing, which is why the tanks were incomplete.
            38. Simargl
              Simargl 5 March 2021 14: 03
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              And do you believe that it saved you from overheating?
              Galvanizing in the sun is not heated until the earth begins to fry.

              Quote: ccsr
              Before you climb to argue, you should at least study a broader lunar epic
              What's the point? Konspirolukhs are already digging into everything. If they break one charm, they find another.
              However, they did not make a single one of their own.

              Quote: ccsr
              It is useless to drive off for 4 km of soil - this is generally a profanation from the point of view of scientific research
              You tell the geologists this. Especially for those who explore craters.

              Quote: ccsr
              because if you take in another area, then you need to do it much further.
              Well, strictly speaking, they did not land in the same place.

              Quote: ccsr
              He worked for a long time, and transmitted pictures to the ground
              Strictly speaking, we got a lot of better quality images at the site. The truth is a little more expensive.

              Quote: ccsr
              you need to get as many pictures as possible from different angles
              What for? What difference does it make if 17 km in size even of the Moon is in place.

              Quote: ccsr
              It is easier to start with full tanks - and why, dig in the literature yourself, then you will find out why.
              So they started with the full ones. What is the problem then?
              And what's the problem with starting with incomplete tanks?

              Quote: ccsr
              There is no secret - the fuel was used during landing, which is why the tanks were incomplete.
              Where did you get it from? Not a single RV, including our Moon, has ever taken off on a landing engine.
              You, along the way, have studied the topic worse than me. I suggested:
              Quote: Simargl
              However, you hardly understand what is at stake. Don't write right away - be surprised.
            39. ccsr
              ccsr 5 March 2021 20: 58
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              Where did you get it from? Not a single RV, including our Moon, has ever taken off on a landing engine.

              I did not even talk about the engine, it was about fuel tanks, in which, according to the Americans, only a wave damping grid was used to eliminate fuel fluctuations. According to experts, this method does not allow guaranteed avoidance of fuel vibrations during vibrations from engine operation, and this is a big problem for rocket technology.
              By the way, since you are talking about the starting engine, then indicate how far the astronauts were from it and what temperature it had inside the docking module during operation. Americans shyly keep silent about it - can you know?
              Quote: Simargl
              Galvanizing in the sun is not heated until the earth begins to fry

              Heats up, just slower. Moreover, you do not take into account the difference in solar energy on the Earth and the Moon, as well as the fact that the air itself removes heat, which is not in a vacuum. It looks like you are still that connoisseur of physics ...
            40. Simargl
              Simargl 6 March 2021 05: 54
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              According to experts, this method does not allow guaranteed avoidance of fuel vibrations during vibrations from engine operation, and this is a big problem for rocket technology.
              Your word enough familiar? Yes, 100% of that was probably not enough. But there was enough to perform the functions.
              There is a video of the Flacon tank - not really big problems there, until the thrust disappears.

              Quote: ccsr
              Heats up, just slower
              Galvanized steel is always cold, or colder than other pieces of iron.
              You didn't seem to notice how this happens.
              They were planted when the surface was cold enough. The nemogliks all howl why there is no such thing under the lander, but there it is clear that the ground is frozen. So there was a lot of heat to dump.
              In LM they were generally freezing.

              Quote: ccsr
              By the way, since you are talking about the starting engine, then indicate how far the astronauts were from it and what temperature it had inside the docking module during operation.
              Astronauts - next to the LM wall, and the wall ... 20-30 cm from the CS
              Quote: ccsr
              Americans shyly keep silent about it - can you know?
              What is there to keep silent ?!
            41. ccsr
              ccsr 6 March 2021 18: 56
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              They were planted when the surface was cold enough.

              Well, what does the surface of the Moon have to do with if the solar energy hit the astronaut and photographic equipment practically at right angles even when the Sun was above the horizon and heating was determined precisely by the angle at which the sun's rays came, and not from the surface temperature.
              Quote: Simargl
              Astronauts - next to the LM wall, and the wall ... 20-30 cm from the CS

              Don't shy away - what was the temperature of the surface of the engine inside the compartment, what do the Americans say about it?
            42. Simargl
              Simargl 6 March 2021 19: 49
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              Well, what does the surface of the moon have to do with it
              It radiates not only the sun, but also the object. So, if there is no place to radiate from the shadow side (reflecting or "hot" surface), then the object is heated.
              A simple example: if you warm up by the fire, it is better to have a wall or at least a tent behind your back.

              Quote: ccsr
              Don't shy away - what was the temperature of the surface of the engine inside the compartment
              According to the drawings, there was no engine inside the compartment! The gap between the combustion chamber and the wall of the habitable compartment is 20-30 cm.

              Quote: ccsr
              what do the Americans say about it?
              Therefore, they don't say anything.
            43. ccsr
              ccsr Yesterday, 14: 33
              0
              Quote: Simargl
              It radiates not only the sun, but also the object. So, if there is no place to radiate from the shadow side (reflecting or "hot" surface), then the object is heated.

              You have already been given an example that the space suit of an astronaut in near-earth orbit experiences a difference of more than 250 degrees in an hour and a half. So there is no "reflective surface" at all except the station.
              Quote: Simargl
              The gap between the combustion chamber and the wall of the habitable compartment is 20-30 cm.

              What was the engine temperature and how did the re-radiation affect the cabin temperature?
              Here's what experts pay attention to:

              This "drawing of Apollo" is just a mockery of common sense! Particularly shocking is the fact that the takeoff stage jet engine (its combustion chamber!) goes deep into the living compartment, and only a small thin-walled cap separates this hot "soldering iron" from the asses of American astronauts!

              https://matveychev-oleg.livejournal.com/6044428.html
              Quote: Simargl
              Therefore, they don't say anything.

              And that doesn't bother you?
            44. Simargl
              Simargl Yesterday, 20: 04
              0
              Quote: ccsr
              You have already been given an example that the space suit of an astronaut in near-earth orbit experiences a difference of more than 250 degrees in an hour and a half.
              Are you getting it right? The surface of the suit experiences this.
              If it's rude.
              What about the fingers on the spacesuit? Run to VDNKh - there, it seems, there were gloves once.

              Quote: ccsr
              So there is no "reflective surface" at all, except for the station.
              And the station is relatively cold. Why - you never answered. I hinted, but in vain.

              Quote: ccsr
              What was the engine temperature and how did the re-radiation affect the cabin temperature?
              Those. Do you think that no heat cutoffs were made there? Despite the materials of the module ...
              Well, yes: they made a high-quality picture, which is difficult to reproduce even today, but here ...

              Quote: ccsr
              And that doesn't bother you?
              Alarming. How can you properly respond to technical nonsense?
              In general, how does NASA react to cospirological attacks? It seems that only direct questions are answered by private individuals, although at the level of Armstrong ... and then everyone who is not too lazy to suck one nonsense out of their finger more sensational than the other, without disdaining anything.

              By the way, how do you assess the heating intensity of the camera, taking into account the energy density of the Sun, the approximate surface area of ​​the camera, silver coating, without taking into account the radiation of the camera itself and heat transfer to the "tripod"?
  • Simargl
    Simargl 2 March 2021 22: 39
    0
    Quote: ccsr
    where are the traces of the rover in their official photo:
    Found. There are two photos: AS15-85-11470 and AS15-85-11471
    There is no trace on AS15-85-11411 either ... but on AS15-85-11413 there are ... however, the wheels are right and left ...
    AS15-85-11438 - no trace ...
    And on AS15-85-11410 there is no boot trace ...
    On AS15-85-11470 it stands and behind the rear wheel you can distinguish a "groove", behind the front wheel you can hardly distinguish a "Christmas tree", but mostly - shoe marks. Probably - the film crew was stomping around. They managed to trample some white garbage in the dust. On AS15-85-11471 he starts, drove 10-15 cm.It can be seen that the soil is not dust, but of the type of coarse sand - in conditions of absolute dryness it is difficult to leave a sane trace ...
  • ccsr
    ccsr 3 March 2021 11: 20
    0
    Quote: Simargl
    It can be seen that the soil is not dust, but of the type of coarse sand - in conditions of absolute dryness it is difficult to leave a sane trace ...

    But what about the pictures of the traces of the rover's movement, which were allegedly taken by the Americans many years later when flying around the moon? And then what do you think:
  • Simargl
    Simargl 1 March 2021 20: 54
    0
    Quote: ccsr
    I think that this was done with only one purpose - to avoid exposure of falsification of filming.
    Expose: tothemoon.ser.asu.edu/gallery/Apollo
  • Simargl
    Simargl 24 February 2021 14: 16
    0
    Quote: ccsr
    You don’t need to believe in anything - refute at least what experts believe it was impossible for the Americans to do on those expeditions.
  • zenion
    zenion 20 February 2021 21: 46
    -1
    Lannan Shi. An article about the USSR, and you have a claim to modern feudal Russia in which they are just beginning to learn how to make steam engines. But compared with the USSR, which made galoshes, this is progress in the sense of regression.
    1. Mikhalych
      Mikhalych 23 February 2021 11: 08
      0
      Another "smart" pshek.
      stop
  • Bar1
    Bar1 21 February 2021 13: 01
    +2
    Quote: Lannan Shi
    Here's a statement. Russia is now unable to produce the T-26,


    Well, it's not true yours. The primitive T26 can be released even WITHOUT DRAWINGS, it is so simple.
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 21 February 2021 18: 20
      0
      Quote: Bar1
      The primitive T26 can be produced even WITHOUT DRAWINGS, it is so simple.
      And there will be not a single rivet in it, because now it is easier to weld the body.
  • Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 21 February 2021 13: 19
    +4
    Quote: Lannan Shi
    There are many arguments for and against.

    We started with a kind of reasonable counterexample, and ended up with some kind of nonsense.

    Arguments "for" and "against" the flight of Americans can be provided by countries that have competence for flights to the Moon. Now it is, in addition to the United States, the European Union, Japan, China, India and Israel (unsuccessful mission). However, for some reason, none of these countries brings any arguments "against", even quite the opposite.

    Also bought by the Americans. Well, or, as an option, they live in the real world, and not in altistory, which is becoming more and more official in today's Russia.
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 21 February 2021 18: 22
      0
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      Also bought by the Americans.
      Intimidated. Especially the Chinese.
  • Mikhalych
    Mikhalych 23 February 2021 11: 05
    -2
    Here's a statement. Russia is now unable to produce the T-26, despite the technological advantage over the USSR 30x. So the T-26 did not exist.

    Dear Lannan Shi! There is no need to start a cancer for a stone! After the T-26, there were the T-34, T-55 and Armata T-14, finally. After the RD-8 rocket engine, a series of more powerful engines appeared. After the F-1, which allegedly had a thrust of 790 tf, we began to purchase the RD-180 with a thrust of 423,4 tf !!! Almost two times less. Why? Because he did not have such a thrust and they still fly on Russian engines!
    So we don’t need to hang on our ears, but rather read "ASHES" fly to the moon !: http://www.free-inform.narod.ru/ and scratch your turnips
    what
  • Reiter
    Reiter 20 February 2021 14: 35
    +1
    In principle, yes, it is high time to classify cartoons of American flights to the moon, if not as nonsense, then as pseudo-scientific fiction.
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 20 February 2021 18: 02
      0
      Quote: Reiter
      cartoons of American flights to the moon is long overdue to classify, if not as nonsense, then as pseudo-scientific fiction.
      From the article
      .... we know about the manned flights of Apollo to the Moon exclusively from NASA.
      Already gave a link to this recently (excerpt from an article in "Technology of Youth" No. 10 1969)
  • Civil
    Civil 20 February 2021 12: 28
    +12
    Rogozin seems to have written this nonsense himself laughing laughing laughing
    Even Vladimir Vladimirovich, the author dragged in just in case.
    And yes. I believe in Soviet scientists, who closely followed all flights.
    What a journalist will not come up with to justify his activities. laughing laughing
    1. Destiny
      Destiny 20 February 2021 12: 40
      +15
      Even Soviet scientists will not be able to convince the adepts of the sect "there were no Americans on the Moon" even the Soviet scientists will be able to convince them otherwise ... All around conspiracies and falsifications of how to live ...
      1. Object.F7
        Object.F7 20 February 2021 15: 04
        -8
        What other Soviet scientists do they have?
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 21 February 2021 13: 31
          +3
          Swindler Armstrong fools Soviet scientists

          President of the USSR Academy of Sciences M.V. Keldysh (sitting) looks with disapproval as V.V. Tereshkova resets the terms of L.I. Brezhnev hangs tsatzki on the overseas rogue
        2. Narak-zempo
          Narak-zempo 22 February 2021 09: 50
          +1
          Quote: Object.F7
          What other Soviet scientists do they have?

          Some Kuhlman, Iceberg and Bracket (Russians according to the passport) laughing
      2. krops777
        krops777 20 February 2021 19: 37
        +2
        Adepts of the sect "there were no Americans on the Moon" even Soviet scientists will not be able to convince otherwise


        The astronauts of Apollo 13 are flying home from the moon and wondering how are we going to descend, then we will have a capsule, then we lost it in the Bay of Biscay. laughing
        1. zenion
          zenion 20 February 2021 21: 50
          0
          krops777 (Alexey). But they were given umbrellas and parachutes, just in case, if the umbrellas fail. Trump's adviser said in all seriousness on the Internet and TV, we did not fly to the moon! Everything is clear, the Russians bought it in a dream.
      3. Mikhalych
        Mikhalych 23 February 2021 11: 10
        0
        Even Soviet scientists will not be able to convince the adepts of the sect "there were no Americans on the Moon"

        And the Adepts of the sect "were Americans on the moon" even reasonable arguments cannot convince them otherwise.
    2. Reiter
      Reiter 20 February 2021 14: 36
      -5
      That is, you are denying the fact of warming between the USSR and the USA in the early 70s?
      1. dSK
        dSK 20 February 2021 15: 34
        +5
        There is no atmosphere on the moon, excellent visibility.
        The moon's Chinese satellite took pictures of the "iron" that remained on its surface.
        Someday our lunar satellite will repeat this and this "state advertising campaign" will end ...
        1. Object.F7
          Object.F7 20 February 2021 16: 00
          -3
          Have you seen those pictures yourself? What kind of "excellent visibility" ... There is a pixel on a pixel, without text signatures "this is a landing station" nothing can be made out. Why did the Chinese provide a picture of such poor quality? Although there are satellite images of the Earth's surface, where it is possible to distinguish between passenger cars and trucks, neither the atmosphere nor the quality of the optics interferes, look at least at Googlemaps and compare with that Chinese photograph, why weren't there any decent optics for the moon? More uncomfortable questions that only increase mistrust
          1. dSK
            dSK 20 February 2021 16: 05
            +1
            As we live to see the successful Moon-25, all doubts will be dispelled ...
            20.02.2021.
          2. ccsr
            ccsr 20 February 2021 17: 33
            0
            Quote: Object.F7
            Have you seen those pictures yourself? What "excellent visibility" is there ...

            Do not be surprised - they only reproduce what the media instilled in them, although to be honest, no one has ever presented a photograph that would prove the ASTRONAUT landing on the moon. And we knew how to land lunar rovers on the moon just as well as the Americans, as well as deliver lunar soil to Earth. So our lunar rovers can be photographed and passed off as American with this quality of shooting.
    3. ccsr
      ccsr 20 February 2021 17: 29
      -4
      Quote: Civil
      I trust Soviet scientists, who closely followed all flights.
      And how could they follow if we didn't even have the equipment for receiving signals from the lunar module, and it appeared near Evpatoria much later than the first launch to the moon was given? Do you even understand what nonsense you are talking about?
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 20 February 2021 18: 12
        0
        Quote: ccsr
        And how could they follow if we didn't even have the equipment for receiving signals from the lunar module ...
        That is, the negotiations between the astronauts and the Lyndon Johnson Space Center could not be traced, and it was impossible to determine where they were from?
        1. ccsr
          ccsr 20 February 2021 18: 50
          +5
          Quote: Bad_gr
          That is, the negotiations between the astronauts and the Lyndon Johnson Space Center could not be traced, and it was impossible to determine where they were from?

          Negotiations are not evidence of a landing - they could have been conducted from the orbit of the Moon through a repeater, or in a tape recording of the lunar module.
          The most important proof could only be the independent reception of the video signal from the Moon, received by the stations of other countries on Earth. There were no such stations on Earth, which is why only those who do not know what playing a radio game is can take the Americans at their word. By the way, once we puzzled the Americans when they considered the operation of our relay as a real conversation from the lunar orbit - this is a well-known fact.
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 20 February 2021 21: 36
            0
            Quote: ccsr
            The most important proof could only be the independent reception of a video signal from the Moon,

            A little higher, in an excerpt from the TM article, it is written that the Japanese made measurements with a laser aimed at the Moon and the beam of which was reflected from a panel with mirrors installed by the Americans on the Moon. Another conspiracy?
            1. ccsr
              ccsr 21 February 2021 11: 09
              +1
              Quote: Bad_gr
              A little higher, in an excerpt from the TM article, it is written that the Japanese made measurements using a laser aimed at the Moon and the beam of which was reflected from a panel with mirrors installed by the Americans on the Moon. Other participants in the conspiracy

              Here's how we did it without disembarking:
              Therefore, their delivery to the moon can be "entrusted" to automatic spacecraft. This was perfectly proven by the Soviet automatic vehicles Lunokhod-1 and Lunokhod-2 (ill. A), respectively, in 1970 and 1973 [http://www.skeptik.net/conspir/append3.htm - research Moon by automatic devices in 1958-76].
              A corner reflector was installed on each of them (in the figure, a white icon indicates it). The mass of the corner reflector is small - 10-20 kg. So you don't have to send astronauts to get the reflectors to the moon.
  • astepanov
    astepanov 20 February 2021 16: 21
    +12
    Quote: A.TOR
    The meaning of the word "rubbish" is revealed in a new way ...
    Not that word. The author piles up his fantasies without frowning.
    For both towers to fold like houses of cards inside, even an aircraft carrier that crashed from the sky would not have achieved such an effect.
    But Boeings had a kinetic energy of about the same as 360 kg of TNT. And that's not all: each one had about 30 tons of fuel, and this is in no way inferior in energy reserves to 200 tons of TNT. But this did not ruin the towers: only after an hour of fire, the reinforcement did not survive - and the buildings collapsed. So the author fantasizes strongly and unreasonably, not to say worse.
    It is also somehow indecent to talk about the weakness of American astronautics: they allegedly did not land on the moon then or later, but the Voyagers set them up outside the solar system, and they send spacecraft to Mars one after another, and go there for years - and this is a hundred times further than the moon, and the landing is incredibly difficult, and the control ... Also, following the author, are they lying? Well, that means that ours are lying, because some of the information from Opportunity went through the equipment of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
    The conspirators got tired of it, it's a word ...
    1. Object.F7
      Object.F7 20 February 2021 17: 11
      +3
      It is one thing to send devices and another to deliver a person, land, take off again and deliver ALIVE to Earth! Don't you really understand the difference? The USSR was the first to send an apparatus to Venus, there were also lunar rovers, but the question is precisely in man! If the Americans really could land on the moon 50 years ago, then back in the nineties they would have successfully flown to Mars, as computer technology stepped over these half a century, and things are still there, yet another attempts to send a person to ... drum roll ... The moon, even if it is interpreted ("repeated"). But why? If there allegedly already existed the necessary rocket, the necessary engines, one hundred percent quality and safety, everyone who flew supposedly returned, decided to reinvent the bicycle ... because the documentation was lost)) such a budget was mastered, and all the documents were stolen by a cleaner, naively
      1. astepanov
        astepanov 20 February 2021 17: 37
        0
        And what does the computer equipment have to do with it? And delivering an apparatus weighing more than a ton to Mars is no easier than landing on the moon. I'm not talking about the device on Titan.
        1. ccsr
          ccsr 20 February 2021 18: 54
          +3
          Quote: astepanov
          And delivering an apparatus weighing more than a ton to Mars is no easier than landing on the moon. I'm not talking about the device on Titan.

          You are mistaken here, because it is much easier to deliver any vehicle without a crew to Mars than to land a module on the Moon with astronauts, and most importantly, take off with them back and dock in lunar orbit. By the way, a couple of days ago I had to dock manually in low-earth orbit, and this is with the current development of technology. And even about the fact that they knew how fifty years ago in the orbit of the moon it is better not to speak ...
        2. Object.F7
          Object.F7 21 February 2021 02: 07
          +2
          Computer technology, are you serious? And what about the element base, an increase in computing power while gaining in weight reduction? Space mission is a struggle for every kilogram! What do you mean nothing easier? An astronaut needs to repeatedly overcome radiation fields without having any protection from radiation, because in the 60s it was a dark forest, you need to return home alive, and soulless vehicles fly with a one-way ticket
      2. Simargl
        Simargl 20 February 2021 19: 24
        +1
        Quote: Object.F7
        If the Americans really could land on the moon 50 years ago, then back in the nineties they would have successfully flown to Mars
        Wouldn't fly. How long to fly there? Year? And back? What is the maximum flight duration at the station? Did a lot of people survive the year? Don't talk nonsense!
        They have not yet learned how to take off from Mars, and it is heavier than the Moon.

        Quote: Object.F7
        because the documentation was lost)) such a budget was mastered, and all the documents were stolen by a cleaning lady, naively
        Almost all documentation is available.
        We have recently digitized the Il-76. Do you know what the problem was? There is no complete set of drawings for one modification. I had to digitize and build the plane, adjusting parts and drawings, along the way adjusting it to current technologies and capabilities. And this despite the fact that nothing has passed since the construction of the last "paper", and "live" copies are actively exploited! So don't la-la!
  • Bar1
    Bar1 21 February 2021 13: 13
    +3
    the real Moon is brown, here is the Moon's globe taken from the images of the Soviet lunar probes.



    but the amerskaya moon is cement-colored, because what they saw from the Earth, they filmed in their Hollywood on a pile of cement.

    1. Simargl
      Simargl 24 February 2021 15: 03
      0
      Quote: Bar1
      but the amerskaya moon is cement-colored, because what they saw from the Earth, they filmed in their Hollywood on a pile of cement.
      Actually, with normal color grading, the surface is yellowish.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 20 February 2021 12: 12
    -7
    How many letters are in the text, uzhos.
    1. Tatyana
      Tatyana 20 February 2021 13: 35
      +8
      Quote: Ros 56
      How many letters are in the text, uzhos.

      Yuri! You are like a small first-grader in school, whom the teacher has to literally force the texts to read in order to pull him out of the children who are lagging behind in reading in the class, and it is terribly hard and lazy for him to do it! It's winter outside. Skates, hockey stick, skis and friends are waiting for him after lessons in the yard.
      You probably don't have a single book at home. Tolstoy - for sure!

      Here on the site - in contrast to studying at school - complete FREEDOM. If you don’t want to read a long text of an article, don’t read it! This is not even an Agreement concluded with you at the bank, so that you must read it before signing it!
      Well, why would you talk like that about the article: "a lot of letters" - and disgrace yourself on this ?!

      If you have age-related vision difficulties when reading, then turn on the service - "read the selected fragment by ear"!

      I read the article with interest. Kennedy's assassination can be omitted. But about everything else, it even attracts attention!
      1. Ros 56
        Ros 56 20 February 2021 17: 06
        0
        You probably don't have a single book at home. Tolstoy - for sure!

        It’s not true, I’m from all over the USSR where I happened to go on business trips, I was carrying books because of their shortage in our country. My wall is not crammed with crystal, but with books, up to Plutarch and Homer, if you have heard something about them. And how have you, the article, added your mind ?, and today I'm just kidding. fellow hi
        1. Tatyana
          Tatyana 20 February 2021 23: 06
          +3
          Quote: Ros 56
          Yours is not true, I have had occasion to go on business trips from all over the USSR, I was carrying books because of their shortage in our country.

          After the collapse of the USSR, the country became very bad with specialized literature. Foreigners immediately noticed this and even once complained to me that they used to go specially to the USSR and St. Petersburg to get books for professionals. And then these books were sold out from us, and they stopped publishing new ones. In bookstores there is a lot of all kinds of colorful and expensive pro-Western "rubbish" - like Viktor Suvorov's "Icebreaker" - and there is no sense in them, only harm.
          And at home I also have a large library on pedagogy, philosophy, economics, physics, astronomy, psychology, medicine, the history of the development of science, about politicians and politics. Nowhere to fold. Writers and professors I know give me their new books. But sometimes you read their gift and involuntarily think that it would be better if they did not give them to me. Before reading their works, I had a better opinion of them than after. Sometimes one feels that the book was written clearly with pro-Western grants, so the author is spinning, revolving around the topic, but cannot really agree on everything - he is shackled by foreign grants. If you ask the author about the grant, it is so!
          I have not read the fiction of modern authors for a long time. Little interesting, but there are excellent works, but very, very few of them.

          As for the Moon, I have been keenly interested in the problem of its origin for a long time and each version and approaches to it by the authors are very interesting to me.

          Enjoy reading!
          1. Reptiloid
            Reptiloid 23 February 2021 12: 39
            +2
            ........ regarding the moon ..........

            You, Tatiana, surprised me and made me very happy. Do you love the moon !!! I also love her since childhood. Also, I rarely (at the present time) meet people who have a large library. After all, now everyone reads e-books or online. It is uncomfortable for me to see. But I also love paper books!
            The Globe of the Moon, as well as Mars, (which I had long dreamed of) I bought as soon as I went to work.
            I have been reading books since I was 4,5 years old. I collect, buy books wherever I can. I am always glad when I meet like-minded book readers! good love hi
      2. nedgen
        nedgen 21 February 2021 22: 38
        +1
        Hi Tatiana, I absolutely agree that the US lunar program for the assassination of Kennedy is about nothing. And the very term of only a week before Kenedy's assassination simply indicates that it had nothing to do with it. After all, such an operation is being prepared for WEEKS if not months. And other far Kenedys look much more convincing as a reason. But about the hoax of the US flight to the moon, a film "Flight of the Kozyroga 1" was created in the US. ("Capricorn One") Why would you? This movie came out in 1978. And in fact about the same, only the flight was to Mars. And by the way, there is a lot of evidence that they did not fly while the so-called. flight evidence is inconclusive, to put it mildly, and even a very large percentage is simply FALSE. hi
  • A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 20 February 2021 12: 12
    +4
    Another test discharge from the adherents of the conspiracy theory.
    We look forward to an article from adherents of the flat earth theory.
    Supporters of the idea of ​​the rotation of the Sun around the Earth are kindly asked to follow the queue.
    1. A1845
      A1845 20 February 2021 14: 56
      +6
      sewn with white thread, any rocket would crash on the firmament
    2. Object.F7
      Object.F7 20 February 2021 15: 07
      -5
      What unites flat-earthers, the Apollo witness sect, and the children who are waiting for gifts from Santa Claus? They all believe in miracles. Children are forgivable
    3. ccsr
      ccsr 20 February 2021 17: 37
      +1
      Quote: A. Privalov
      We look forward to an article from adherents of the flat earth theory.

      I wonder if now the Jews will be able to walk in the desert for forty years to prove your theory of the emergence of the state of Israel? If they cannot, then we will have to reconsider the whole history and question the decisions of 1947. So can you repeat their journey now or not?
    4. Simargl
      Simargl 20 February 2021 19: 31
      +2
      Quote: A. Privalov
      we kindly ask you to stay in line
      What for?
      A flight to the moon is impossible, because it is flat, rolling over a solid sky, along a complex trajectory over a flat Earth. The sun, accordingly, revolves around the edge, around a flat earth.
      1. region58
        region58 20 February 2021 23: 49
        +2
        Quote: Simargl
        since it is flat, rolling across the solid sky,

        Well, you are greatly simplifying this: there are at least eight crystal spheres - Pythagoras still wrote, and then there is the kingdom of heaven ... wassat
        1. Simargl
          Simargl 21 February 2021 05: 49
          0
          Quote: region58
          Well, you are greatly simplifying this: there are at least eight crystal spheres
          So they are on next to each other, and one above the other, i.e. to get the next one, you have to break through the previous one! Right now, one has been cut through and the ISS is rolling along it, and the wheels are simply disguised.
          1. region58
            region58 21 February 2021 14: 40
            0
            Quote: Simargl
            the wheels are just disguised.

            Here are those times ... request I thought there were skis ... wassat
            1. Simargl
              Simargl 21 February 2021 14: 43
              0
              Quote: region58
              I thought there were skis ...
              At first I thought that solar panels are actually wings, but they stick out in different directions ... it turned out - sails.
  • Baloo
    Baloo 20 February 2021 12: 13
    +6
    So on June 4, 1963, Kennedy signed Executive Order 11110, according to which the Federal Government, for the first time since 11110, received the right to print currency without going to the US Federal Reserve.
    Before this there was a meeting (there is a photo in the internet) Kennedy with an old dragon, one of the founders of the FRS V. Baruch. This was Kennedy's verdict.
    1. Snail N9
      Snail N9 20 February 2021 12: 32
      +2
      Now, when the United States has finally gone too far, began to "in an adult" run into China, the Chinese took and published the fact that their photographs of the "proof" of the Americans' stay on the Moon are actually not in the same resolution as they were presented publicly - this is not even computer processing, a- "revision" for the sake of "good neighborly relations". But in fact, no traces of the "lunomobile" movement are visible in the photographs, but only a spot from a lunar landing, apparently, of an unmanned vehicle is visible.
      1. Anatole Klim
        Anatole Klim 20 February 2021 12: 49
        +5
        Quote: Snail N9
        Now that the United States has finally gone too far

        Whether the Americans were on the moon or not is not so important now, the main thing is that they are not there now! And then recently they declared the Moon a zone of their interests, declared their right to extract minerals there, actually grabbed the satellite, another exceptional rudeness.
      2. Krasnoyarsk
        Krasnoyarsk 20 February 2021 14: 30
        +5
        Quote: Snail N9
        But in fact, the pictures do not show any traces of the "lunomobile" movement, but only a spot from a lunar landing, apparently, of an unmanned vehicle is visible.

        You are a risky guy, they will peck you here now.
        I read a lot of comments on the article. The most powerful argument of the supporters of the American voyage to the moon was the word - BRED.
        When the author of the article asked why the Americans jump out of the descent vehicle jovial, while ours are sluggish, not capable of independent movement, a simple and powerful answer follows - delirium.
        This is not a question of knowledge, but a question of faith. The United States said - flew - then flew. The President said that falsification was impossible, so they were flying. And that's it. And the president immersed himself in this topic as deeply as Y. Mukhin did in his book "Antiapollo. The US Lunar Scam"? I think no. Sometimes presidents are wrong.
        1. Snail N9
          Snail N9 20 February 2021 14: 51
          +5
          This is actually a real photo from a Chinese station. For comparison, there is a photo and LRO. On the basis of these photos, a computer "re-drawing" was carried out - the folds of the surface were given out for the tracks of a lunomobile, given the uninterrupted dogma that this was the landing site of the Apollo:

          There is truth and such a "photo":
          laughing
          1. Tektor
            Tektor 20 February 2021 15: 17
            +4
            There is a GIF, compiled from two photographs, allegedly of the Apollo 14 landing site.
            I was interested in two pictures with a XNUMX year interval.

            M109345337L 2009-10-05 01:27:49 UTC Incidence Angle: 3.77 ° E Phase Angle: 9.85 °

            M157709871R 2011-04-17 20:03:23 UTC Incidence Angle: 23.23 ° E Phase Angle: 22.11 °

            They show a good match, are comparable in quality and at the same time differ in the angles of illumination of the shooting location.

            Let's combine them in one GIF-ke.
            [media = http: //economics.kiev.ua/picture/forum/apollo_14_1.gif]

            It can be seen that the play of light-shadows at different angles of illumination give a visual shift in the elements of surface irregularities. But this does not happen with the lander itself and, allegedly, with traces of wit. Those. they are drawn, added.
        2. dauria
          dauria 20 February 2021 14: 54
          -6
          And the president plunged into this topic as deeply as Yuri Mukhin did in his book

          The President does not need to make a living with such fairy tales as Mukhin Yu. There are other fairy tales in the price.
          You know, if we were to disassemble the pyramids in Egypt, then in 100 years there will be "historians" who will prove that there have never been any pyramids.
          1. Object.F7
            Object.F7 21 February 2021 04: 11
            0
            Watch the film "Revelation of the Pyramids" on YouTube and I assure you, there will give exhaustive evidence that modern so-called Egyptology, like Egyptologists, is a bunch of liars, charlatans, and the truth is somewhere far beyond the conventional dogmas. And if we add to this film the testimonies of many pilots about contacts with flying vehicles based on some new physical principles, in a word, UFOs, it becomes clear that the world is not at all as simple as it seems to an ordinary person and we are generally not told a lot in university schools about history in general. And it would be fine if those pilots were some cadets of schools, no, this is also said by test pilots who are difficult to suspect of inadequacy or weakness for alcohol and drugs.
          2. nedgen
            nedgen 22 February 2021 00: 14
            0
            Excuse me, Alexey, have you even read Y. Mukhin's book?
        3. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 20 February 2021 16: 29
          0
          how did Yu. Mukhin do it in his book "Antiapollo. Lunar scam of the USA"?

          I repeatedly argued with Yu.I. Mukhin on this topic, but everything to him is God's dew. He even screwed me up in his book, but did not give any arguments, more and more babbling about "the waving flag and the absence of stars in the sky." The most important argument was that no one personally brought him a suitcase with regolith to the editorial office. The academic publication "Lunar Soil from the Sea of ​​Abundance", which I personally presented to him, he simply perverted. This monograph provides a comparative analysis of the soil delivered by both the Americans and ours, and there was an exchange of samples.
          1. Object.F7
            Object.F7 20 February 2021 17: 40
            0
            What is the point, if the Soviet leadership agreed to the Union-Apollo deal, then it is quite obvious that in 1971 Soviet scientists compared a soil sample delivered by the Luna-16 apparatus with a soil sample delivered by the Luna-16 apparatus as part of an "exchange" with the States and lo and behold, the complete similarity of this soil was confirmed, it is lunar. Curtain)
          2. ccsr
            ccsr 20 February 2021 17: 46
            +2
            Quote: Aviator_
            This monograph provides a comparative analysis of the soil delivered by both the Americans and ours, and there was an exchange of samples.

            Even this fact itself does not prove that American astronauts landed on the moon - they just did the same manipulations as our lunar rovers. Didn't such a thought come to you during a dispute with Mukhin? I may not agree with Mukhin in everything, but he raised questions that our president and his entourage are unable to answer, since they are not from Soviet techies, but from Soviet humanities who studied the work of Okudzhava and Brodsky, and not higher mathematics and physics. That is why you can sell them something that Soviet engineers who know space topics not from the media are unlikely to believe.
            1. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 20 February 2021 22: 45
              +1
              You see, at that time even a country like the United States could not pull two programs at once - the delivery of soil using the AMC and through a manned mission. As for the issues raised by Mukhin, I can say the following. He started well by publishing the brochure "The Katyn Detective" in 1995, but fame turned his head greatly, he began to promote his idea of ​​the "Army of the People's Will" (while not applying its basic principles in his edition), later raved about teaching and fundamental science, "refuted" the theory of relativity, later found a gold mine about the Apollo lunar mission. I had a lot of discussions with him on these occasions, some of them were published and a number of arguments were hushed up.
              1. ccsr
                ccsr 21 February 2021 11: 17
                0
                Quote: Aviator_
                He started well by publishing the brochure "The Katyn Detective" in 1995, but fame turned his head a lot, he began to promote his idea of ​​"The People's Will Army"

                I agree that he is more of a "revolutionary" and tribune, but the idea to expose the American lunar scam was thrown to him by some of the real experts to raise his image, and provided him with the necessary argumentation. Although not all of our world-class specialists are shining on this topic, there are too many holes in the American version, and this in itself suggests that it was a hoax.
                Here is the opinion of Shilnikov, a well-known specialist in narrow circles who believes in the landing but does not believe in the television broadcast of the landing on the Moon:
                The reasoning is also quite obvious that if the astronauts could not land on the moon, it would be not only fatal for NASA, the US government, but also a complete loss of the country's prestige, that none of the NASA leadership, all participants in this project and politicians in no case could I admit it. Where did the 26 billion go? Therefore, in theory, it can be assumed that NASA could really, in a pinch, go to such a hoax.
                But it seems to me a more realistic explanation of the discrepancy between the frames shown to the whole world of astronauts staying on the Moon. No, they were actually there, collecting soil and stones, walking and driving ... But the quality of the transmitted images, due to the long distance from the Moon to the Earth, was too bad to be shown to the whole world. Therefore, NASA took advantage of the frames that were filmed at the training grounds on Earth during the training of astronauts there and in a hurry did not notice those signs on the frames that should be removed or retouched or painted on... This is all the more supported by the fact that such actions of NASA during the recent demonstration of frames from Mars (color tint of soil images obtained from Mars) were convincingly exposed by many scientists and they had to admit it.
                1. Aviator_
                  Aviator_ 21 February 2021 18: 46
                  0
                  I got acquainted with the opinion of Shilnikov, let it remain with him. The United States brought soil from the Moon, and in huge quantities. I will post a scan with its study and comparison with our regolith after the holidays. Nobody gave Mukhin an idea, as they say now, to "make a hype" on the American lunar program. He himself decided in pursuit of the circulation of his newspapers. By the way, he never paid royalties for articles, only to V.S.Bushin at the beginning, when promoting his newspaper. And then he stopped, and decided to save on Vladimir Sergeevich, then there was a great controversy with them, where Mukhin professionally smeared dirt on the honored front-line writer-writer. Before his release (it is not clear why) Mukhin published many books, even his autobiography, from which it follows how smart and correct he is. A lot of self-admiration. In general, my opinion is that the former head of the planning department of a ferromanganese enterprise, a Kazakh refugee who bought an apartment in Moscow, quickly became a classic modern journalist.
                  1. ccsr
                    ccsr 21 February 2021 20: 53
                    0
                    Quote: Aviator_
                    I got acquainted with the opinion of Shilnikov, let it remain with him.

                    Those. not all specialists in the USSR believed in the possibility of American broadcasting from the moon - that is quite enough for me.
                    Quote: Aviator_
                    The United States brought soil from the Moon, and in huge quantities.

                    Nobody saw these 300 kilograms, and those grams of soil that they distributed could have been delivered by machine guns, or found on the earth's surface.
                    Quote: Aviator_
                    In general, my opinion is that the former head of the planning department of a ferromanganese enterprise, a Kazakh refugee who bought an apartment in Moscow, quickly became a classic modern journalist.

                    In principle, I agree with this, I read his works and I did not like everything about them. As for me personally, I learned about the problems with the lunar scam not from Soviet sources, but from German television in the eighties, when I saw a big film. And this was long before the performances of Gordon and Mukhin in the nineties, so this topic became known to me from other sources. And now so many materials have appeared thanks to the Internet that only naive people can believe in the noodles that the Americans hung up to us.
                    1. Aviator_
                      Aviator_ 21 February 2021 20: 56
                      0
                      In the 80s, journalists also worked on German television, greedy for unusual sensations, and even now they have not gone anywhere. Consider me a naive person if it makes it easier for you.
                      1. ccsr
                        ccsr 21 February 2021 20: 59
                        0
                        Quote: Aviator_
                        In the 80s, journalists also worked on German television, greedy for unusual sensations, and even now they have not gone anywhere.

                        The film was on American materials (or American), and was broadcast on ARD, if memory serves, i.e. the channel was official.
                      2. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 21 February 2021 21: 54
                        0
                        The film was on American materials (or American), and was broadcast on ARD, if memory serves, i.e. the channel was official.

                        Does this increase its credibility?
                      3. ccsr
                        ccsr 22 February 2021 11: 10
                        -1
                        Quote: Aviator_
                        Does this increase its credibility?

                        No, of course not, I just saw for the first time something that was hushed up in the USSR. I will not hide that even among those officers I know who participated in the first launches of cosmonauts, this topic was practically not discussed, i.e. none of them clearly believed in this epic and did not discuss the subtleties of this program, although they personally served at Baikonur for many years.
      3. Krasnoyarsk
        Krasnoyarsk 22 February 2021 00: 31
        +1
        Quote: Aviator_
        , but did not give arguments, more and more babbling on the topic of "a waving flag and the absence of stars in the sky." The most important argument was that no one personally brought him a suitcase with regolith to the editorial office.

        Why do you stoop to outright lies?
        In order to make out the "waving flag and the absence of stars in the sky" there was no need to write a book of 420 pages.
        Or do you want to say that he dedicated 400 pages to your person?
        1. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 22 February 2021 11: 10
          0
          Why do you stoop to outright lies?
          In order to make out the "waving flag and the absence of stars in the sky" there was no need to write a book of 420 pages.
          Or do you want to say that he dedicated 400 pages to your person?

          As a writer living off the volume of writing, he wrote his opuses on these topics. He devoted a couple of pages out of these 400 to me, where he thickly and clumsily tried to slap my professional knowledge. And this is a person who still does not know why an imaginary unit was introduced in mathematics, although he once graduated from the Dnepropetrovsk Metallurgical Institute.
    2. nedgen
      nedgen 22 February 2021 00: 13
      0
      Hi, it seems to me that VVP solved the question very well. In other words, someone who believes that skyscrapers could have formed like a house of cards will not convince them of ALL evidence of a lunar scam. Something like this hi
  • Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 20 February 2021 15: 50
    +3
    Quote: Snail N9
    But in fact, the pictures do not show any traces of the "lunomobile"
    Without a normal reference, not an argument at all, but I will write in support: with the actual filming of the "lunomobile" races on the moon, it is generally bad luck, the suspension works with a heavy load, from some kind of fright the wheels throw out fountains of sand, at a maximum speed of 18 km downhill ... in short no moon under the wheels of a "lunomobile". Well, appreciate the insanity, 300 kg of "lunomobile" type to the moon to deliver, and a normal drilling rig was not needed. No cores!
  • mark2
    mark2 20 February 2021 12: 35
    +1
    Ahhh ... So that's why the whole World and the USA were especially so happy when Musk finally managed to lift two goners to the ISS !. Before that, they only shot cartoons and movies about space. Exactly! ... And their shuttles are staged. Nobody saw their launch. And eyewitnesses of these launches lie as eyewitnesses. good
    If there are people who believe in what is written in the art, then why do these same people not believe in the superiority of Russian technologies over the USA?
    And so ... abstractly.
    The article mentioned prl 11 September. I would like to know the second opinion on how the building was supposed to fall? Like a tree or what? Everyone understands that this is a stone in the swamp of secrecy of special tower explosions. But is it really the size of the plane? It was not the plane that destroyed the towers, but the fire, which heated the supporting structures to the temperature of buckling, or loss of bearing capacity. And then the upper floors crushed the lower ones.
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 20 February 2021 13: 47
      +4
      Before that, they only shot cartoons and movies about space. Exactly! ... And their shuttles are staged. Nobody saw their launch. And eyewitnesses of these launches lie as eyewitnesses.
      of course, like the Third Reich built bases under the ice of Antarctica and on the Moon even before 1944 ... the city madmen have a very gloomy genius ... wink Even the USSR had the interception of radio transmission (sound and telemetry) of all Apollo missions, plus it made observations on the flyby trajectory with launching and entering orbit, and there (the Moon) and here (Earth), not to mention the docking with the Soyuz and the capsule deceleration in the atmosphere and its splashdown, the Chinese are still (well, stupid), the pictures are shown with landing platforms and traces on the regolith, the lunar Rover! laughing
      1. region58
        region58 21 February 2021 00: 06
        +1
        Quote: Intruder
        USSR possessed radio transmission interception

        "Interception" is probably still somewhat different, it implies some kind of "illegal" seizure of information. The fact is that at that time no one bothered much about encrypting transmissions from space, the only thing could be that the standards did not match, and so - you can accept, well, accept. Not so long ago I had a chance to talk with a man who served at the NPC at that time, I had a chance to hear a lot of interesting things. yes
      2. nedgen
        nedgen 21 February 2021 23: 22
        +2
        Even the USSR had the interception of radio transmission (sound and telemetry) of all Apollo missions, plus it made observations on the flyby trajectory with launching and entering orbit, and there (the Moon) and here (Earth), not to mention the docking with the Soyuz and the capsule deceleration in the atmosphere and its splashdown, the Chinese are still (well, stupid), the pictures are shown with landing platforms and traces on the regolith, the lunar Rover!

        Excuse me, but can you say WHO in the USSR had the opportunity in 1969 to monitor the flight path of the Apolons? In low-earth orbit, yes, and then? Yes, there were no such radars in the whole world then, and now I'm not sure what they are. In addition, EVERYONE who could observe and detect something was then under the pagon or secret carriers. And how do you imagine that these people will start writing and talking without permission? And about the traces on the moon from the rovers. laughing don't tell my shoes. What magnification should a telescope have to capture a 10cm wide track from 300 km? Of course, there are telescopes on the ground with a huge magnification, but what trail could have remained if the lunar module was to land on rocket thrust, and then also TO TAKE OFF (and the take-off thrust should be greater than when landing !!!) and the dust should have been blown off by hundreds meters around and even the rover itself during takeoff too? And how did the traces remain on the rocky ground after all? And if someone says that there is no air, so what? And where did the gases from the nozzle go? And the dust itself should have filled these traces after takeoff, if these traces at all could have remained for some reason.
    2. Reiter
      Reiter 20 February 2021 15: 05
      -2
      You saw how buildings fall by themselves and with a controlled detonation, well, look and compare. And why exactly so symmetrically and neatly did the upper floors begin to fold onto the lower ones and not fall on one side, and in both buildings it is so the same? There have been many fires in skyscrapers in the world, but for some reason only in the twins the fires caused such a collapse of the structure. I am waiting for an answer, what caused the same addition of the adjacent building? Did it collapse for the company? What do they write in the State Department manuals? Where are the remains of the plane that crashed on the Pentagon? Where!??? Where are the chemical weapons from Iraq? Where is the soil and films from the Moon? They are not there because they were not there? May I add questions about MH-17. Where is the dispatcher, where are the American satellite images? Why are all Western witnesses in the Netherlands incognito? You offer to take them at their word the same, the West never lies? It is easy to live with such a people, they hawala any noodles and do not even think with their own heads, herd, sir. And if something does not grow together in their nonsense and climbs out - so it's a conspiracy theory! Universal excuse. DB!
      1. mark2
        mark2 20 February 2021 20: 08
        -3
        Everything in your head is mixed with a mixer. And you did not think that buildings of such a height could have been previously designed in such a way that, in case of destruction, they would fall with the smallest spread over the area. No, well, you can trust, trust anyone and anything. What is it to me? Our believers are protected by law.
        1. Object.F7
          Object.F7 21 February 2021 03: 31
          -1
          And you did not think that buildings of such a height could have been designed in advance in such a way that in the event of a fire they would not fall at all.
          1. mark2
            mark2 21 February 2021 08: 57
            -3
            You are a dunce Sharik.
        2. Reiter
          Reiter 22 February 2021 15: 25
          0
          With the same success you can be called believers in the blizzard that the US media are pushing you. When buildings are destroyed even by a controlled demolition, and even then, they do not always add up exactly. And here there are two different huge buildings, there is always a scatter of parameters and conditions, they have never tested such buildings for self-destruction, they even only designed them, and then once and everything turned out like that, what the skill of the designers! To believe in this, this is just a bastard, well, believe further. By the way, what about the third building, it collapsed because it was projected to collapse if these two twins fall? Or do you have an even more delusional explanation?
      2. Volga125
        Volga125 21 February 2021 17: 56
        +2
        I will add. For some reason, neither Popov nor Mukhin mentioned one point in their books.
        There is no atmosphere on the moon, so lunar landing is possible only with the help of a jet stream,
        as in vertical takeoff and landing aircraft such as Harrier or Yak-38.
        For the subsequent takeoff, a lot of fuel is also required to bring the device to the circumlunar
        orbit. Landing and takeoff requires large fuel and oxidizer tanks.
        If we look at the image, for example, the Luna-16 spacecraft, we will see that a greater
        part of the apparatus consists of tanks, and the scientific module itself is small in comparison with them.
        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B0-16
        If we look at the image of the so-called American descent module,
        then we will see that his tanks are small. How did he land and take off then?
        https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5aad6dd58309056915ba815e/kak-rabotal-lunnyi-modul-orel-5d5164c3fbe6e700add303e6
        What is shown there for the soft landing of two people in spacesuits, fuel for the subsequent
        takeoff, as well as about 60 kg. the soil that they allegedly dug up and the actual apparatus itself is not enough.
        You just need to compare the volume of the tanks of Luna-16, which brought only 101 grams of soil and Needle.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. stels_07
      stels_07 22 February 2021 08: 05
      +1
      And the Wtc7 inside was also formed from the fuel? + announced this 15 minutes before the fall .. I will not say anything about the story with the Pentagon
  • Sergej1972
    Sergej1972 20 February 2021 12: 36
    +6
    If there really was a decree on the issue of money without the consent of Congress, then Kennedy really violated the US Constitution and committed a state crime. By the way, Kennedy's victory in the presidential election was considered by many in the United States to be dubious. Much has been written that Kennedy crossed the path of certain influential forces. But after all, powerful political and economic circles stood behind him. He should not be idealized. He was a man on his mind, with many skeletons in the closets. Although a politician, he was undoubtedly outstanding.
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 20 February 2021 13: 42
      +2
      By the way, Kennedy's victory in the presidential election was considered dubious by many in the United States.
      already the victory of "sleepy Joe" is considered dubious ... wink
      1. nedgen
        nedgen 21 February 2021 23: 26
        0
        And the victory of the pedestrian Bush (George Walker Bush) was rigged in general hi
  • Sibguest
    Sibguest 20 February 2021 12: 40
    0
    A very interesting article.
    I did not know about the imminent death of von Braun after the Apollo program was closed, but that Kubrick had the imprudence to repent of participating in falsification and suddenly died - they talked and wrote about this.
    Moreover, there are many sane American scientists and journalists.
    1. Intruder
      Intruder 20 February 2021 13: 41
      +2
      and suddenly died
      many people suddenly die, such is life, but if this happens to a famous person, then immediately the theory of a worldwide conspiracy ... laughing wink
      1. Reiter
        Reiter 20 February 2021 15: 14
        +4
        If someone removes someone as an unnecessary witness, then this is already a conspiracy theory, even if he really lived like that, the main thing is that everything looks like an accident, the wheel fell off, the brakes failed, the scarf around his neck suddenly tightened, self-shooting twice in the back etc. And of course, suspicious people come up with all sorts of nonsense, no one in the world ever gathered secretly and did not agree among themselves and did not make secret plans, all the special services of the world are fake! The main thing is to believe everything that the hegemon says, he will not deceive.
        1. Intruder
          Intruder 20 February 2021 15: 30
          -6
          If someone removes someone as an unnecessary witness, then this is already a conspiracy theory, even if he really lived like that, the main thing is that everything looks like an accident, the wheel fell off, the brakes failed, the scarf around his neck suddenly tightened, self-shooting twice in the back etc.
          that is, the majority of road accidents in the world is a conspiracy of special services in your opinion ??? Hmm, I'm already scared ... honestly, it's worse than King's novels !!! belay I will not even ask about man-made disasters and natural ones too .., the conspiracies of Masons (Illuminati and others) and reptilians to heaps come directly to mind ...!?
          1. Reiter
            Reiter 20 February 2021 17: 49
            -3
            The truth, as a rule, is in the middle, one does not need to rush to extremes, not everything inexplicable is the result of secret conspiracies, but also not everything that the official authorities bring to us ready-made is true. To understand what is what and a person has a head. Not all murders are conspiracies, but not all murders are accidents, there is both. I hope you don’t think that J. Kennedy was killed by the lone Oswald? And Martin Luther King? By the way, most of the conspiracy theories over time are still confirmed, I recently came across material about what people considered conspiracy theories a hundred years ago. And the fact that the earth is round was also considered a few centuries ago heresy and conspiracy theories.
            1. Intruder
              Intruder 20 February 2021 18: 06
              +2
              Truth is usually in the middle,
              somewhere near... wink
          2. Reiter
            Reiter 20 February 2021 18: 01
            -1
            You are a happy person if you think that everything that official sources tell you is the truth. As long as there are such naive majority in this world, you can continue to twist whatever you want. And please tell me, what do you think, are there all tenders in the world, in the USA, in the Russian Federation, in the EU for purchases, construction, development, etc. won fairly?
            1. Intruder
              Intruder 20 February 2021 18: 09
              0
              You are a lucky person
              not always and not as often as I would like it myself!?, this is a rather invariant quantity in modern times .. winked
              what do you think, are there all tenders in the world, in the USA, in the Russian Federation, in the EU for purchases, construction, development, etc. won fairly?
              I am not very fond of certain categories in our society ..., especially - cunning merchants and politicians, and fortunately, I do not trust them all, and from one side or the other, this is about tenders ... and other competitions!
              1. Reiter
                Reiter 20 February 2021 20: 20
                +1
                Well, if they come up with very cunning combinations, and very inventive ones ("secret conspiracy" is the most correct definition for some), then why is big politics not doing the same, but on an even larger scale?
                1. Intruder
                  Intruder 20 February 2021 22: 31
                  0
                  why big politics does not do the same, but on an even larger scale.
                  engaged of course ... wink , that's why it is large, therefore, the scale, there is its own ... but, so to absolute everything there and lower in terms of the same policy, exactly as "secret conspiracies" I would not, my personal opinion! Banal financial interests (as at any other time) in the big "trough" of state budgets, in serious and greedy people, somehow in this version!
                  1. Reiter
                    Reiter 21 February 2021 02: 14
                    0
                    It is not so easy to reduce everything to finance, finance itself does not cost anything if there is no way to protect and increase it. And this requires power, and in the struggle for power there are completely different alignments, an order of magnitude more difficult and tougher. Tools of a higher order are already available there, so the combinations are more complex and risky.
      2. nedgen
        nedgen 21 February 2021 23: 32
        0
        many people suddenly die, such is life, but if this happens to a famous person, then immediately the theory of a worldwide conspiracy.

        The problem is that, as someone said, more than one coincidence is no longer a coincidence (and with the lunar program there are not coincidences, but TOO MUCH explicit fakes). And when the number of doubtful facts becomes too large, then theories become not theories but facts. And in order not to confess to deception, then all who are against and doubt are announced by the compilers of conspiracy theories. hi
      3. stels_07
        stels_07 22 February 2021 08: 18
        0
        And 50 non-natural deaths of persons involved in the case in Dallas, also an accident ...
    2. Simargl
      Simargl 20 February 2021 19: 41
      -1
      Quote: Sibguest
      Kubrick had the imprudence to repent of participation in the falsification and suddenly died - this was discussed and written about.
      He never said anything. If you are talking about a fake video, then why is there not a single video of normal quality, where a very famous person from the profession is filmed with professional equipment, where professional cinema equipment is used. Simple question. I also compared faces - yes, the same bearded man.
      I advise you to remember the "space advisor", or whatever, who "gave an interview" for the Times.
  • kamakama
    kamakama 20 February 2021 12: 43
    -5
    Everything would be fine, but there is no longer an ideological war. Space flights are expensive. There is still nothing to objectively do on the Moon, which means that there is no point in flying there. Except perhaps as a qualification exam for countries creating their own space industry. Type 1) launch a satellite - primary school, 2) launch into a geostationary station - middle 3) launch a person - technical school certificate 4) launch to the moon - bachelor's degree 5) launch beyond Earth's orbit - well done, quite an adult. Now you can think about something serious
  • iouris
    iouris 20 February 2021 12: 44
    +3
    Kennedy was killed for domestic American reasons unrelated to the Moon. The lunar program is the advanced development of technology at the expense of the US state budget. The military budget was not enough. The moon landing is a side effect. The USSR took part in a conspiracy of silence for "goodies". As a result, domestic programs for the development of computers were curtailed, US standards were adopted, and became dependent.
    1. nedgen
      nedgen 21 February 2021 23: 34
      0
      Absolutely agree with you hi
  • forty-eighth
    forty-eighth 20 February 2021 12: 50
    +8
    With a pain in my heart, I read how another nemoglik lost the lunar soil.
    Fortunately, the Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry, RAS Vernadsky preserves valuable items better than non-glazed ones, so the lunar soil there is safe and sound and did not disappear anywhere.
    Come on excursions.
    1. Cosm22
      Cosm22 20 February 2021 13: 54
      +9
      Good point.
      By the way, about excursions.
      Anyone who has doubts about the American landing on the Moon and the delivery of lunar soil to Earth can be advised to open this link - https://zelenyikot.livejournal.com/83598.html
      This article contains an excellent photo report of the test cosmonaut of the Roscosmos cosmonaut corps Sergei Kud-Sverchkov, which was taken during his business trip to the United States in the Lunar Samples Laboratory - the very place where the lunar soil obtained during the Apollo program is stored.
      Great photos in great quality.
      True, the question remains unclear - how did such an amount of lunar soil get to the United States, if, as any adherent of the "lunar conspiracy theory" knows since the days of Kubrick, the Americans have never been to the Moon?
      1. Krasnoyarsk
        Krasnoyarsk 20 February 2021 14: 36
        -1
        Quote: Cosm22

        True, the question remains unclear - how did such an amount of lunar soil get to the United States,

        The Japanese, having examined this "regolith" in their laboratories, said that it was the soil of the state of Nevada.
        1. Cosm22
          Cosm22 20 February 2021 14: 55
          +8
          Not such statements can be seen on the fence.
          But when making an argument, you should always rely not on the OBS data, but provide a link from a fairly authoritative resource.
          1. Krasnoyarsk
            Krasnoyarsk 20 February 2021 15: 07
            -3
            Quote: Cosm22
            provide a link from a fairly authoritative resource.

            Are the Japanese lab staff an authoritative resource?
            I hope you understand for what reasons they did not make a fuss about this? But through their channels they expressed their "fi"
        2. forty-eighth
          forty-eighth 20 February 2021 15: 18
          +1
          The Academy of Sciences of the USSR, having examined this regolith in its laboratories, said that it was soil from the Moon.
          1. Krasnoyarsk
            Krasnoyarsk 20 February 2021 15: 42
            +2
            Quote: forty-eighth
            The Academy of Sciences of the USSR, having examined this regolith in its laboratories, said that it was soil from the Moon.

            The USSR Academy of Sciences did not investigate this soil. This was done by the Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Vernadsky.
            Now try to find a report on these studies. Good luck.
            1. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 20 February 2021 16: 35
              +2
              The USSR Academy of Sciences did not investigate this soil. This was done by the Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Vernadsky.

              Now try to find a report on these studies. Good luck.

              Well, firstly, the RAS is what remains of the USSR Academy of Sciences, so here you are wrong. At that time there was no RAS yet, there was the USSR Academy of Sciences.
              Second, the big report, Lunar Soil from the Sea of ​​Abundance, was released. After the holidays I'll post a scan, a book at my work. Will you endure until the 24th?
            2. forty-eighth
              forty-eighth 20 February 2021 16: 57
              +1
              Excuse me:
              1.A.P. Vinogradov On the genesis of the lunar regolith
              2. Bogatikov O.A. Anorthosites of the Earth and the Moon - a comparison experience
              3. A.P. Vinogradov, V.I. Nefedov, V.S. Urusov, N.M. Zhavoronkov X-ray electronic study of lunar soil from the Sea of ​​Abundance and the Sea of ​​Tranquility
              Questions?
          2. Reiter
            Reiter 20 February 2021 18: 08
            0
            They can quite assert that, if we assume that the USSR is an interested party and there is a certain agreement on this topic between the USA and the USSR, the state archives are already all and fully available for that period?
            1. forty-eighth
              forty-eighth 20 February 2021 18: 40
              -2
              It can be assumed that the world government is paying tribute to the penguins.
              It can be assumed that corals have the most developed intelligence.
              It can be assumed that parallel lines in Euclidean geometry are sines.
              It can be assumed that the Andromeda galaxy is inhabited by Pokemon.
              But why?
              1. Reiter
                Reiter 20 February 2021 20: 16
                +1
                That's right, but why think at all, you just have to eat what you were given. If you read a little about how discoveries are made in science, investigations in forensic science, you would hesitate to suggest not to make assumptions. Your examples do not at all explain why it is impossible to explain the position of the USSR on US flights to the moon by the presence of a certain deal with interest for the USSR, enshrined in the treaty. There are many such examples in history, when the actions of subjects of the international level were regulated by tacit documents, this is not at all a fantasy but the realities of life. So why not be like this here too !?
      2. A1845
        A1845 20 February 2021 15: 00
        +3
        Quote: Cosm22
        how did so much lunar soil end up in the USA
        everything is simple, there is no USA, these are all cartoons
        1. Krasnoyarsk
          Krasnoyarsk 20 February 2021 15: 48
          +4
          Quote: A1845
          Quote: Cosm22
          how did so much lunar soil end up in the USA
          everything is simple, there is no USA, these are all cartoons

          In fact, the USSR handed out, literally by gramme, its regolith to all known laboratories: mattress mats, naglo-Saxons, Franks, Germans. Name the countries to which the United States was transferred, at least in grams from 300 kg. allegedly delivered by them.
          1. Aviator_
            Aviator_ 20 February 2021 16: 39
            +3
            Name the countries to which the United States was transferred, at least in grams from 300 kg. allegedly delivered by them.

            Dear, in the USSR they also transferred their soil, wait until the beginning of the next working week, I will also scan this page in "Lunar soil from the Sea of ​​Abundance".
          2. forty-eighth
            forty-eighth 20 February 2021 17: 16
            +3
            Let me give you a list of the distributed regolith from the Apollo 12 mission, excluding American, English and German addressees:
            South Korea - 1 gr. moon stones, 2 gr. moon dust
            Italy - 1 gr. stones, 1,5 gr. dust
            Belgium - 8 gr. stones, 4,5 gr. dust
            Norway - 5 gr. stones, 1 gr. dust
            Japan - 81,5 gr. stones, 2 gr. dust
            France - 7 gr. stones, 3 gr. dust
            Czechoslovakia - 1 gr. stones, 1 gr. dust
            Switzerland - 34 gr. stones, 16 gr. dust
            Spain - 1 gr. stones, 1 gr. dust
            Finland - 18 gr. stones, 0 gr. dust
            India - 12 gr. stones, 1 gr. dust
            Questions?
            1. Reiter
              Reiter 20 February 2021 18: 11
              +1
              And how can this amount of soil be proof that there were Americans on the moon, even if suddenly these grams are real? The USSR also has lunar soil, but the cosmonauts did not seem to have been there.
              1. forty-eighth
                forty-eighth 20 February 2021 18: 34
                +3
                In the sense of? Actually, here they asked for a list of countries that received samples of lunar soil from the Americans, I gave it. What's wrong?
          3. Aviator_
            Aviator_ 1 March 2021 20: 01
            0
            Well, what was promised earlier




      3. Object.F7
        Object.F7 20 February 2021 15: 16
        0
        This is the same soil that no one can explore, because prohibited by law? Oh, well, they probably store not only lunar soil, but also Martian and Mercurian soil. The Americans have already been to Mars, haven't you watched the movie The Martian?
        1. forty-eighth
          forty-eighth 20 February 2021 15: 21
          +1
          This is the same soil that can be explored in turn, since it is allowed by law.
          1. region58
            region58 21 February 2021 00: 20
            +1
            Quote: forty-eighth
            in order

            A bit wrong. Not in the order of the queue, but if you make a well-founded request: the laboratory wants to do such and such a study, with the help of such and such equipment, and find out this and that. If no one has done anything similar, or there are