Moon epic in Russian and American

47

In early October of this year, the world celebrated the 55 anniversary of the launch of the first Soviet artificial Earth satellite, marking the beginning of the space age. October 4 Director of the Space Research Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences Academician Lev Zeleny stated that the plans of the Russian scientists up to 2021 of the year include the creation of habitable bases on the Moon, work on the Phobos-Grunt mission and the implementation of the Russian-European project ExoMars. Speaking as part of the Space Science Day at IKI RAN, the scientist stated: “Our lunar missions are a kind of prelude to manned missions to the Moon and the creation on its surface of a series of astronomical observatories.” The first two moon landings are planned for 2015 and 2018.

And at the beginning of 2006, the head of Energia Rocket and Space Corporation, Nikolay Sevastyanov, said that Russia plans to create a permanent base on the Moon for 2015 and to begin commercial production of helium-2020 isotope for thermonuclear energy from 3 ( thermonuclear when oil and gas run out on Earth can prevent an energy catastrophe). The American reaction followed immediately: in the same month, US President George W. Bush put forward his plan for space exploration, which envisaged “creating a settlement on the moon” and “flying to Mars” ...



Shortly afterwards, in October, the head of the Federal Space Agency of Russia (Roscosmos) A. Perminov and the administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration of the United States (NASA) M. Griffin signed an agreement on conducting joint studies of the moon and mars. Following the meeting, M.Griffin "did not rule out" that America and Russia would be able to organize a joint mission to the moon, saying: "I look forward to the next decade when we return to the moon. I think we will see how the first Russian and American astronauts will along its dusty paths. "

Now many no longer remember that the USSR not only opened the space era in stories mankind, not only sent the first man into space, but also became the first country that managed to fly around the moon, land an apparatus on its surface and photograph the reverse side of the Earth satellite. As part of the lunar program of the USSR back in 1968-1970. several successful flights (with the apparatus returning to the Earth) by automatic spacecraft Zond were made (vehicles with serial numbers from 4 to 8, which were an unmanned analog of the Soviet spacecraft L-1, intended for the lunar flyby of two cosmonauts) . Zond-4 (launched on 2 in March 1968 of the year) flew in a trajectory similar in parameters to the trajectory of a ballistic flyby of the Moon (reached an elliptical orbit at a calculated point remote from Earth on 330 000 kilometers), and for the first time in the world returned to Earth from deep space. For the first time in the world, the flight of the Zond-5 apparatus (15-21 of September 1968) to the Earth at the second cosmic velocity of a spacecraft with living creatures on board (turtles) after the flight of the moon.

Thus, before the so-called. The US Apollo-8 mission of the USSR already took precedence over the United States in returning a spacecraft from deep space to Earth and was the first to send living beings to near-moon space. However, then the "lunar" initiative was lost. Moreover, it was caused by psychological rather than technological factors.

According to the official version, 20 July 1969, at 20.17 GMT, the American ship Apollo-11 landed on the lunar surface. After 8 hours, a man, according to American journalists, "for the first time realized his dream and found himself on another planet." The US media showed the world the commander of the crew of Neil Armstrong (Neil Armstrong), who, "touching the surface of the moon," said the words in the story: "This is a small step for a man, but a huge leap for mankind!" one giant leap for mankind).

The leadership of the Soviet Union simply ignored (as China did) the landing of the Americans, stating that this is nothing more than a “well-mounted movie.” However, the Soviet propagandists did not further develop this theme. The officials from the space program did not do this either. Is that in 2006, the head of Roscosmos A. Perminov, who said in an interview with the newspaper "Arguments and Facts" that "no doubt" in the "reality of lunar expeditions," at the same time noted that some of the video "just in case" was filmed by the Americans "in Hollywood" .

Several years ago, a thorough study of the US moonlight scam by Y. Mukhin saw the light of day in Russia. Based on a thorough analysis of the photos and videos of what is considered the flights of Americans to the moon, the author argued that all of them were shot on Earth by masters from Hollywood. According to him, the Soviet leadership of that time “covered” the American lunar scam because the US intelligence services blackmailed the Central Committee of the CPSU with allegedly available evidence of Khrushchev's involvement in Stalin’s murder in March 1953. Their announcement in those years when Soviet-Chinese relations were heated to the limit, including because of the disagreement of Mao Zedong with the debunking of Stalin and his course in the USSR, could lead to unpredictable consequences. (According to another point of view, the leadership of the USSR “saw in its refusal to expose the American fraud obtaining a strong trump card for permanent political pressure on the USA”).

Over the past forty years of 1969, there have been fewer skeptics. Rather the opposite. One of the most scandalous myths in the history of astronautics does not cease to excite consciousness.

Back in 2000-s. On the Internet, allegedly unmounted recordings of the Armstrong Group Stay on the Moon were posted, with members of the crew even visible! In newspapers, headlines like: “All of their flights are deftly made in Hollywood hoaxes with the goal of creating a US image of a great state ...”. About six years ago, in the program of the German television channel "Box" (which demonstrated a two-hour film dedicated to the US lunar program Apollo), the convincing position of supporters of the lunar conspiracy theory of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration USA (NASA) was presented. According to German journalists, at least 20% of the US population believes that the "landing on the moon" of Americans is a Hollywood hoax with a political and ideological background. That is, even in the USA, many people understand that Apollo flights are “just a movie.”

Several years ago, a significant event occurred in America. In the program “Dark Side of the Moon”, shown by CBC Newsworld TV channel, the widow of a famous Hollywood master of directing Stanley Kubrick, who died of a heart attack (the death version was openly questioned in the American press ), told an unusual story.

At a time when the USSR was already mastering space with might and main, US President Richard Nixon, inspired, according to the widow, by her husband's science fiction film epic, which went down in history as one of the best Hollywood masterpieces 2001: Space Odyssey (2001: A Space Odyssey, 1968), called on the director, along with other Hollywood professionals, to "save the national honor and dignity of the United States." What the masters of the "dream factory" did! According to the CBC Newsworld TV channel, firstly, the footage of the landing of American astronauts on the Moon was rigged by craftsmen from Hollywood, and secondly, the falsification decision was made at the highest level (personally by the US President).

Interestingly, a couple of years later, in 1971, Kubrick left the United States for Great Britain and never came back in America. All his subsequent films were shot only in England. For many years the director led a reclusive life, obviously fearing something all the time. According to the English newspaper Sun, the director "was afraid of being killed by US intelligence agencies, following the example of other participants in the tele-support of the lunar US fraud." His death 9 March 1999 in the English estate under Hertfordshire is still a mystery, exciting the biggest European tabloids.

The director allegedly died of a heart attack at the end of the editing period of his latest and most mysterious film Eyes wide shut, in which Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman played the main roles. It was Kidman in July 2002, in an interview with The National Enquirer in America that hinted transparently that Kubrick went to the best world against his will. According to the actress, the director called her 2 hours before the official time of a sudden death and asked not to come to Hertfordshire, where, as he put it, “we will all be poisoned so quickly that we don’t even have time to sneeze”. According to British journalists, the National Security Agency employees tried to kill the US for the first time back in 1979 for the first time.

The possibilities of "lunar" deception do not exclude not only journalists and people related to the "factory of dreams", but also some American astronauts. So, Brian O'Leary (Brian O'Leary) stated that “he cannot give an 100-percentage guarantee that Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin really visited the Moon”.

Rocket Engineer Bill Kaysing, who worked at Rocketdyne, the company that built the rocket engines for the Apollo program, is the author of the book We Never Fly to the Moon. The American cheating cost of 30 billion dollars "(" We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle "), published in 1974 year and written in collaboration with Randy Reid, is also convinced that under the guise of live coverage of the lunar landing NASA module has distributed a fake shot on Earth. The specialist believes that a military ground in the desert of Nevada was used for the filming. In pictures taken at various times by Soviet reconnaissance satellites, one can clearly see the huge hangars, as well as a large portion of the "lunar surface" dotted with craters. It was there that all the “lunar expeditions” filmed by Hollywood experts took place. The evidence was presented by NASA itself: the analysis of the taken pictures and video recordings raises numerous questions to which experts still cannot find an answer.

Finally, we list only some of them, the simplest, but nevertheless unanswered for decades. Why is there a lot of technical inconsistencies in the official "landing video": the image in the frame does not twitch, the length of the shadow does not coincide with the position of the sun, on the "surface of the moon" there is a suspicious trail of an astronaut as if he set foot in the mud? Why did the crew members die so suspiciously quickly after visiting the Earth satellite? Why does the American flag flutter and rinse like a wind blown on a moon without atmosphere? Why are the shadows of astronauts and stones on the surface cast in different directions, which indicates several sources of light? Why the rocket engine of the lunar module did not leave a crater on the surface of the moon? And finally, why, after the “landings”, if they took place, were all the explorations of the Moon stopped? Why is there no way the Saturn rocket is used in the United States, which could supposedly put almost 150 tons of cargo into near-earth orbit? Why are lunar stations not built on the moon? The Americans claim that they will land on Mars in 2014 (as President Bush declared 2006 in January), and if they really are on Mars and not in Hollywood, then why don't they practice these landings on the Moon?
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    12 October 2012 09: 21
    Clear business, that dark business! I watched several films, some prove that there were no landings, others vice versa. If we find out the truth, then most likely soon!
  2. Eraser
    +5
    12 October 2012 09: 55
    Why did the crew members somehow painfully suspiciously quickly die after visiting the Earth’s satellite?
    , Apollo 11 crew Michael Collins and Buzz Aldrin are still alive, Neil Armstrong died this year, laughing In the video "deceased" Aldrin communicates with a supporter of "conspiracy theory" angry
  3. snek
    0
    12 October 2012 10: 01
    I’ve been arguing with one comrade here on a site for three days on this topic (each one with his own opinion and remaining).
    I believe that they were on the moon. This is why I think so:
    Firstly, I have not heard that at least one of our designers or cosmonauts said that there was no flight to the moon, while Leonov, Grechko and Wolf said that these flights were.
    Secondly, there are published comparative analyzes of the lunar soil brought by our automatic stations and donated by the Americans. This, of course, is about the research of Soviet scientists. Here's an example of an electronic version of an article in the magazine New in life, technology from 78 years:
    http://epizodsspace.airbase.ru/bibl/znan/1978/02/2-him-lun-gr.html
    Thirdly, the exploration of the moon will constantly evolve and hide the deception over time would be simply impossible. Photos of landing sites already exist:


    Yes, they are made by an American satellite and theoretically they have the possibility of falsification. But then there will be satellites of other countries. Hindus have already claimed that they photographed the Apollo landing sites:
    http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2009-01-11/pune/28013039_1_apollo-la
    nding-terrain-mapping-camera-india-s-chandrayaan
    Other expeditions are planned, including Russian expeditions, so it would be virtually impossible to hide the signs of falsification, if it had taken place.
    1. +5
      12 October 2012 10: 30
      You know, it hurts they famously drove there on their scooter. Yes, and these tracks .... somehow very clearly and continuously look. Therefore, I do not believe that they were there. Just big doubts.
      1. snek
        +1
        12 October 2012 11: 02
        You know, I’ve already participated in many srach in-depth discussions on this topic. Each side has its own arguments and opponents have counterarguments and so on. But, as it seems to me, today it’s not even so important whether they were on the Moon, but more importantly, who will be on it.
        1. +2
          12 October 2012 11: 19
          Snack, here is a link where all inconsistencies are scientifically refuted, http://www.skeptik.net/conspir/moonhoax.htm about shadows, a flag, and so on, the article is large, but I advise you to read quite interestingly. Well and so a photo for a laugh
          1. +4
            12 October 2012 11: 21
            one more picture))))
          2. snek
            0
            12 October 2012 11: 23
            Srgsoap I threw already these lunar disputes (which, by the way, are often waged like this: here’s a link where it shows that the flight is garbage, and here’s a counterlink, that there’s garbage in your link, and here’s a link to you that your counterarguments are not friendly) meaning, etc. etc.). If you do not believe in flying - this is your holy right.
            1. 0
              12 October 2012 11: 30
              Yes, I don’t argue, I just believe it, because there were technical capabilities. And I threw the link to you, I thought it would be interesting if you are in the subject.
              1. snek
                0
                12 October 2012 11: 35
                Srgsoap, I'm sorry something is somehow inattentive today. Of course, I was on this site (probably already on all sites on this topic).
        2. 0
          12 October 2012 11: 20
          I completely agree. The moon is our natural testing ground for flights, landings, take-offs and other technical elements of space technology. Us have explore space, whether we want it or not. This is already an element of the survival of all mankind. At the same time, I would very much like that there were no weapons in space.
          1. snek
            0
            12 October 2012 11: 27
            Wedmak, I agree - we already sat up in the Tsialkovo cradle.
            Quote: Wedmak
            At the same time, I would very much like that there were no weapons in space.

            I would also like to believe in it, but, unfortunately, it does not work.
    2. biglow
      +1
      12 October 2012 15: 56
      snek,
      By the way, pay attention to this map, the terrain in the landing area is hilly or embossed and in the photo we see something similar not a plain, not a single hill or hill. How can this be.?
      1. snek
        0
        12 October 2012 16: 15
        Quote: biglow
        in the photo we see something similar not to a plain, not a single hill or hill.

        look more closely and think about how the hills will look if you look at them vertically down
        1. 0
          12 October 2012 16: 49
          Cast clear long shadows like craters do.
        2. biglow
          +1
          12 October 2012 17: 30
          snek,
          in hilly terrain, the horizon is never flat
    3. cropman
      -1
      1 March 2013 20: 19
      There is not even a theoretical possibility to falsify LRO images!
      The satellite's on-board computer is not even theoretically capable of such "feats" - the satellite transmits what it sees to Earth. Further, the images are received by radio astronomers around the world (scientific cooperation) and transferred to the University of Arizona, where it is too late to falsify them (the copies remained with the radio astronomers who received the images).
    4. cropman
      -1
      1 March 2013 20: 47
      Nikolai Malishevsky is not an honest author. Never did the Soviet or Russian leadership deny flying to the moon. There is a photograph of Armstrong with Kosygin in the Kremlin. Kosygin was photographed with a swindler and a swindler?
      The famous space tourist Denis Tito is trying to organize the first flight of Americans to Mars in 2018, but we can’t figure it out with the Moon? Read: cropman.ru/letali/
      1. 0
        29 December 2013 01: 20
        Quote: cropman
        There is a photograph of Armstrong with Kosygin in the Kremlin. Kosygin was photographed with a swindler and a swindler?
        Kosygin is photographed and with a bald hell - party discipline, however. And if these are all your arguments, then I'm sorry ...
        1. cropman
          0
          29 December 2013 14: 49
          Can you read to the end? There are 50 of my arguments.
    5. +2
      29 December 2013 01: 12
      Quote: snek
      Firstly, I have not heard that at least one of our designers or cosmonauts said that there was no flight to the moon, while Leonov, Grechko and Wolf said that these flights were.
      Forgive me, but even such glorified, but COSMONAUTS are not specialists. And Leonov always said everything that they wanted to hear from him. Enough of his nonsense about "flying saucers" (which he saw or told him about them) to stop unconditionally accepting his "testimonies" on faith.

      Secondly, there are published comparative analyzes of the lunar soil brought by our automatic stations and donated by the Americans.
      The mass of soil that the Americans gave us was only 29 grams. This amount could have been delivered by automated stations. All other "analyzes and confirmations" provided by the "strategic partners of the United States" do not inspire confidence: it is enough to recall how they all suddenly confirmed the discovery of "cold fusion" by Fleischmann and Pons, which they later severely regretted: all this turned out to be falsification. By the way, Americans resort to scientific falsification quite often - they have nothing to fear, no one will dare to incriminate them anyway.

      Photos of landing sites already exist:
      Yes, they are made by an American satellite and theoretically they have the possibility of falsification.
      That's it.
      But then there will be satellites of other countries.
      When will it still be ...
      Hindus have claimed to have photographed Apollo landing sites
      Suck your ears if a "great and independent" country like India refutes the American data. Yes, even before England, they still cannot leave the Kama Sutra.

      Other expeditions are planned, including Russian expeditions, so it would be virtually impossible to hide the signs of falsification, if it had taken place.
      Keyword - "planned". In reality, they will take place in ... eleven years, so the US has nothing to fear. Hollywood steers!
  4. +3
    12 October 2012 10: 25
    Again, theories .. Not so long ago there were even pictures of the lunar surface with supposedly traces of astronauts and you can even see the platform of the landing module. Only it’s hard to see ... And the tracks are also somehow strange ... As if drawn. At the modern level of graphics, even a ship of desipticons could be drawn there - go prove it is not true.
    And what was it worth (after all, we reached the moon - an achievement!) To turn the Hubble telescope (or any other optical) towards the moon for an hour and show an unprocessed photo of the landing site. AND? It's not difficult, is it? But no ... hiding something.
    1. Eraser
      +1
      12 October 2012 11: 27
      I already wrote about Hubble
      "" The telescope has a mirror with a diameter of 2,4 meters and can distinguish objects on the Moon, the distance to which is about 400 thousand kilometers, about 80 meters in size. Therefore, even the high resolution of the Hubble telescope, orbiting the Earth in low orbit, cannot provide an image of the Apollo lunar modules with dimensions of only a few meters, left on the lunar landing sites. Such images could be taken with a telescope ten times the size of the Hubble telescope, or with a much smaller telescope in circumlunar orbit. "
      "NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has taken a series of ultraviolet images of the moon to find a suitable landing site for future expeditions.
      The resolution of the images is 50-100 meters, which is clearly not enough to view the Apollo spacecraft on the Moon. However, the new images turned out to be the most detailed of all that have ever been taken by Earth or near-Earth instruments. "
      1. +1
        12 October 2012 11: 41
        Wait, i.e.
        to find a suitable place to land future expeditions.

        permission was enough, but not enough to see the place of landing? Yes, quit ...
        Again, what does the resolution of 50-100 images mean ???? 50 m per pixel? or per cm? or mm? And here's another question: are you sure that you were shown the pictures with maximum resolution?
        1. snek
          0
          12 October 2012 11: 44
          per pixel. The Hubble, of course, is a powerful telescope, but not so much.
          1. +3
            12 October 2012 11: 50
            And yet, little faith in their flights. Perhaps because of my phobia (I don’t believe them and I am very negative about this country) regarding America as a whole.
            1. Konrad
              +1
              12 October 2012 18: 46
              Quote: Wedmak

              And yet, poorly trusted

              Why
        2. Blat
          +1
          16 October 2012 20: 30
          they’ll drop everything there and urgently deploy all their telescopes to prove to you and people reading the yellow press))))))))))))))))))))))) and the traces remained because the structure was a dust moon such that all grains of sand grapple with each other. they are more like a hedgehog since there is no erosion. stars are not visible because the shooting was carried out using light filters and so on. and you read the yellow press are worthy sources))))))) )))))))))) there were just morons who needed to make themselves known and started to question it. they became popular, but only with suckers. here it got out and about the traces in the absence of humidity and that the stars are not visible and why flag waving
  5. ICT
    0
    12 October 2012 10: 51
    Quote: snek
    Thirdly, the exploration of the moon will constantly evolve and hide the deception over time would be simply impossible. Photos of landing sites already exist:


    it really remains only to rely on the common sense of the American authorities of that time
  6. 0
    12 October 2012 11: 06
    as they say
    Lies, pees .... and provocation winked
    I believe that they were not there!
    1. Konrad
      +2
      12 October 2012 18: 48
      Quote: Check
      I believe that they were not there

      Gagarin was not there either, but the Earth is flat (the Moon too) !!!!!!!!! Make a fool of us!
    2. Blat
      -1
      16 October 2012 20: 31
      but the union recognized that they were there. For what purpose did the union need it?
  7. wolland
    -4
    12 October 2012 11: 32
    I think everyone is tormented by this, they were, they weren’t. We know that our repeaters were the first to get there, and other things that they still use today. They bought engines from us, Well, they couldn’t just do this physically, all the hype did so that they didn’t face the face of the Cold War with the USSR. At that time there was no Internet, no cellular communications, no mail, but only news from the horizon, there were ........ then there were .... no one at that time could and had no idea to assume that who who someone is deceiving ...... and after years, people have become smarter and a mannequin comes up.
    1. +3
      12 October 2012 12: 08
      wolland, Of course, I already wrote this, well, I’ll write it again.
      There was more than one flight, there were six... For some reason, our cosmonauts do not even doubt, but the Internet fighters are ready to shout "IT WAS NOT" in spite of all the facts
      1. -7
        12 October 2012 14: 20
        Are these not the astronauts who are now bankers? Perhaps one of them signed a letter on June 28, 2005 in support of the verdict to former Yukos executives. ” Currently a vice president of OTP Bank?

        Grechko brazenly Lied about the fact that he allegedly heard the broadcast directly from the Moon, although in fact he could not hear anything directly from the Moon, it was just a broadcast that was broadcast around the world.
        And just do not need me here about the fact that he is a hero twice ... He was a hero until he became a traitor!
        1. Konrad
          0
          12 October 2012 18: 50
          Quote: viktorR
          He was a hero until he became a traitor!

          And whom did he betray? Specifically.
  8. snek
    +1
    12 October 2012 11: 42
    Skeptics, of course, will not be interested, but for those who are simply interested in the subject, here is a rather interesting film about the technical difficulties of the lunar program and how they were solved:
    http://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3796532
    1. 0
      12 October 2012 14: 12
      Not that I would be a skeptic, but the problems in this film do not prove that they were there. One could argue for a long time. But why is the lunar program rocket no longer used? Why was Von Braun, chief designer, retired at the height of the program? And where is the engine so powerful and cool? Why are Americans now buying engines in Russia?
      Or such crap http://gorod.tomsk.ru/index-1241589115.php - he did this trick with downloading photos from the NASOV site in high resolution. Were, were not? I don’t know, but the black astronaut and von Brown and the deceased are very mysterious with the first astronaut, and other specialists, with shadows in the photo, and with light sources, and with the suddenly (!) Missing originals of the first moon landing. Just the skeptics as such did not originate here, but in America, and it was precisely those people who began to work on the lunar program that laid the foundation for them. It’s just that all the evidence could have been fabricated, but the truth is, this does not prove that it was fabricated :)
      1. snek
        +2
        12 October 2012 16: 21
        I gave the link not to prove something to someone, but simply for those interested in the topic.
      2. cropman
        0
        30 December 2013 10: 45
        The first US astronaut to make a suborbital flight was Alan Shepard. He then flew to the moon (commander of Apollo 14) and died of leukemia in the 75th year of his life.
        The first US astronaut to complete an orbital flight is John Glenn. Then, at the age of 77, he flew into orbit in a shuttle and is still alive. You, viktorR, just spread gossip about "the very mysteriously lost first astronaut"!
  9. +3
    12 October 2012 15: 09
    When a person in all seriousness mentions in an article by Mukhin as an authoritative source, this is a diagnosis
    1. +1
      12 October 2012 17: 05
      Mukhin, of course, the "shot" is still the same. But not all he says is "paraffin". There are things that were not invented by him, but only retold by him, and from the fact that he retold them they did not become untrue or absurd.
      1. +1
        12 October 2012 17: 52
        Mukhin conspiracy therapist. You can actively pull words and mix them. Words from this will not get worse - but the meaning is lost. He has about the same.
  10. +3
    12 October 2012 15: 43
    For those who are interested in flying or not flying, I advise you to read this material here. I have not read the best.
    Did the Americans fly to the moon?
    1. biglow
      0
      12 October 2012 16: 08
      good satya on the link. there is still a photo analysis made by the filmmaker, a lot of interesting
    2. 0
      12 October 2012 17: 01
      The article delivered, there are no refutations of the basic arguments of the skeptics! And it brought about fakes that supposedly for fun, the Nazis themselves did ...
      Take this one (http://www.skeptik.net/conspir/moon_pic/earth1.jpg - a link from your article, no time to look for nasa) a photo from nasa's website and do the operation shown in my earlier post http: // gorod .tomsk.ru / index-1241589115.php - and you will be very surprised. Of course, this only proves that only the photo is fake, but the question immediately arose, WHY?
  11. mamba
    0
    12 October 2012 16: 51
    If we had a rocket (by the way, what kind?) For flights of "probes" around the moon, then why did everything rest on the unfortunate H-1? Why did her disasters buried our lunar program?
    1. Konrad
      0
      12 October 2012 18: 55
      Quote: mamba
      Why did her catastrophes bury our lunar program?

      This question could be answered by those who were in power in the USSR in those years, but they had already decayed in their varnished coffins.
  12. Eraser
    +1
    12 October 2012 16: 56
    But why is the lunar program rocket no longer used?
    , because it is not economically profitable,
    Why was Von Braun, chief designer, retired at the height of the program?
    He retired after 5 landings,
    And where is the engine so powerful and cool?
    Kerosene was not needed, and modified hydrogen will be used in the Space Launch System.
    Why are Americans now buying engines in Russia?
    , probably because they didn’t have such at that time, in 1996.
    Or such crap http://gorod.tomsk.ru/index-1241589115.php
    if you take this photo from here http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo17/html/as17-134-20384.h
    tml, but not scanned from the GRIN site, such a focus can not be turned out.
    suddenly (!) missing originals of the first moon landing
    , the originals of the video recording of the broadcast from the Moon, which was done on Earth, disappeared, I do not see anything terrible in this, there is no picture quality there.
    people who started working on the lunar program.
    , and what kind of people? smile
    1. -3
      12 October 2012 17: 27
      From the photo: Maybe it won't work with yours, but this one (http://dayton.hq.nasa.gov/IMAGES/LARGE/GPN-2000-001137.jpg) gets it very much. Let's open it up in Photoshop and go to Image-> Adjustments-> Hue / Saturation and set the slider to saturation at 100 and brightness somewhere between 35-40. I would like to draw your attention to the site from which the photo is pulled (for those who are in the lunar module, these are official photos from the NASA site, so to speak, the primary source).

      and what kind of people?

      We carefully read the article. it is written there)
      , probably because they didn’t have such at that time, in 1996.

      Of course it wasn’t), but was it at all?
      Kerosene was not needed, and modified hydrogen will be used in the Space Launch System.

      Of course, kerosene is not needed, it’s easier to buy from Russians))


      I will not argue on other issues. Everything is possible as you say.
      1. -1
        12 October 2012 18: 10
        Someone tried to change the contrast in the photo, saw the result, was upset because of the Americans and smacked me minus laughing
  13. Kir
    -1
    12 October 2012 18: 01
    The most interesting thing is that the Yankees will never voluntarily close a program that promises them money and power, and there is still a question on the topic of so many expeditions 1) what did they make from this show !, 2) they already explored everything and understood everything on the Moon Then why come back!
    In short, abstracting from were not! why it was necessary to make so many landings, what is the purpose? Moreover, they are wildly mercantile!
  14. Eraser
    +3
    12 October 2012 18: 28
    According to the photo:
    , the official photos start with as, and the photos of the GRIN journalism department start with GPN AND GPN-2000-001137.jpg is a scan from photo as17-134-20384 which is the original source. Well, and besides, why the rest of the photos are supposedly not shadows, or what? smile
    As for people, the Rocket Engineer Bill Keysing did not work there as an engineer, did not develop engines, but was engaged in paperwork, quit in 1963 6 years before the flights to the moon, what could he have known about then? Brian O'Leary after that phrases, more on this topic did not speak, even it was besieged by the "conspirators". As for the engines, it was then, 25 years after the F-1, that they did not have such an engine, just such a powerful kerosene, they are weaker. For the Superjet, foreign engines are used, so what?
    Of course it wasn’t), but was it at all?
    Well, then what did Saturn take off from? Thousands of people saw it take-off live, not to mention the means of observation, in the end there was the Soyuz-Apollo program, is it really even a hoax in which it’s direct! participated in the USSR?
    1. -3
      12 October 2012 18: 56
      Well, then what did Saturn take off from? Thousands of people saw it take-off live, not to mention the means of observation, in the end there was the Soyuz-Apollo program, is it really even a hoax in which it’s direct! participated in the USSR?


      Conclusion into the near-earth and lunar orbits as different things. As I understood from talking with you, you do not own the subject of the dispute, because you are not aware of the facts and conclusions made by skeptics. You probably just do not want to understand this.

      , the official photos start with as, and the photos of the GRIN journalism department start with GPN AND GPN-2000-001137.jpg is a scan from photo as17-134-20384 which is the original source. Well, and besides, why the rest of the photos are supposedly not shadows, or what?


      These are scans (!) From the official photo, And that I didn’t catch my eye after retouching, I caught the scanner. And I repeat again, this only proves that nasa gives out a fake for the original (lying in general). But why nasa is lying, this is an interesting question.

      As for the people, the rocket engineer Bill Keysing didn’t work there as an engineer, he didn’t do engine development, but did paper work, quit in 1963 6 years before flying to the Moon, what could he know then?

      Are you directly familiar with people from the personnel department who gave him these pieces of paper to transfer)? He quit before flying to the moon, but after the start of the lunar program.

      they just then 25 years after the F-1 did not have such an engine, it was such a powerful kerosene engine that it was weaker. After all, foreign engines are used for the Superjet, so what?


      Why, 40 years after the FAILURE of the lunar race, Russia has an alliance (what happened within the framework of the program), and the Americans don’t have an engine after 25 years. Isn't it strange?
      1. Eraser
        +3
        12 October 2012 21: 15
        Are you directly familiar with people from the personnel department who gave him these pieces of paper to transfer)?
        these facts from his book wink ,
        Russia has a union (what happened under the program)
        , the Americans made the shuttles, and about the engines, I will repeat the F-1 again was not an image of profitability and it was made specifically for Saturn-5.
        These are scans (!) From the official photo, And that I didn’t catch my eye after retouching, I caught the scanner.
        Well, actually, my link also scanned a photo, how can she get on the Internet then?
        Conclusion into the near-earth and lunar orbits as different things.
        Saturn-5 launched the Skylab station into orbit, the mass of which is almost 80 tons, which is comparable to Apollo along with the third stage.
  15. -2
    12 October 2012 18: 43
    In the photo for the article, there are two more astronaut prints inside the chain of footprints. "Believers" in Americans, explain where did they come from? In such an uncomfortable spacesuit, in order to turn 90 degrees, you need to do at least one step over. So there must be more tracks at an angle of 45 degrees. Or perhaps in order to turn around 90 degrees in a spacesuit, you generally need to "stomp" on the spot. Where is your logic? I'm sorry though. As for the logic to the "believers" - I'm at the wrong address. "Do you believe? So believe and don't ask."
  16. delakelv124
    0
    12 October 2012 19: 46
    call girls ------ http://rlu.ru/a8z
    -
    order by phone in the form ----- http://rlu.ru/a8z
    -
    No SMS! No registration!
    -
    low prices, checked license plates --- http://rlu.ru/a8z
    -
    if all numbers are visible
    girl WORKS today
    if the last two digits are replaced by "xx"
    busy or day off
  17. +2
    12 October 2012 22: 22
    He served in the VKS in Soviet times. The doubt that the Americans were on the moon arise only among amateurs and hacks, craving sensations.
    1. Kir
      0
      14 October 2012 18: 12
      This is something like that in the USSR in the VKS, if this name was given only in 1992, or "Vika" is lying, or call things by their proper names.
  18. Feroma
    -4
    13 October 2012 01: 59
    One thing is clear, the amers were terribly nervous about being behind us (at least in space), and they came up with this carefully worked out trick with flights to the moon. I even dare to suggest that for the sake of convincingness there were also real things, that is, engines, spacesuits, astronauts, etc. all this was demonstrated including the Soviet delegation, which was specially invited on the eve of flights. One thing is not clear - this is the mythical consent of the country of the Soviets, supposedly the US special services were blackmailing the Kremlin, I can’t understand what exactly was in the dirt. By the way, all the followers of the lunar conspiracy miss this, because if the USSR wanted it, they would quickly, vividly and definitely prove that the amers were not on the moon, this is such an information bomb, the Cold War is in full swing and there is such a gift. Why was the USSR silent, only it bothers me, maybe there really was something? Or a real flight to the moon, or some powerful compromising material? I can not believe that the USSR and China had such serious disagreements, even if they were, then what about this? The USSR at that time was so strong, paramilitary, that there is some kind of China? I think this is a thesis presented by the author as something dubious? Time will tell when someday our grandchildren will fly to the moon and only then will there be the truth of all times and peoples - the USA is a great magician, a world swindler or the USA is a really strong technological advanced country.
  19. vassso1
    -2
    14 October 2012 22: 14
    Yes, they were not on the moon, Lord ...
  20. +1
    27 October 2012 23: 18
    About 20 years ago, at work, I talked with one of the famous astronauts on the question - were the am-ts there or not? Answers - were. We constantly took their telemetry in detail. I have reason to believe.