Military Review

In the lunar scam of the United States put a bullet!

843
In the lunar scam of the United States put a bullet!



Published a death interview with renowned filmmaker Stanley Kubrick, in which he told in detail and thoroughly that all lunar landings were fabricated by NASA and how he shot all the frames of American lunar expeditions on Earth ... Thus, in many years of unprecedented lunar fraud by the United States itself worldwide recognized by the Hollywood master of directing put bold and final point.



The interview is published later 15 years after death. Director T. Patrick Murray interviewed Stanley Kubrick three days before his death in March 1999. He was previously forced to sign an 88-page non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for the contents of the interview during 15 years from the date of Kubrick's death.

Here is a transcript of an interview with Stanley Kubrick (in English).

Kubrick’s deathbed interview in recent days has become a real sensation all over the world.

In 1971, Kubrick left the United States for Great Britain and never again appeared in America. All his subsequent films were shot only in England. For many years, the director led a reclusive life, fearing murder. According to the English newspaper San, the director "was afraid of being killed by US intelligence agencies following the example of other participants in the tele-support of the lunar scam of the United States."

The director died suddenly, allegedly from a heart attack at the end of the editing period of the film With 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 American newspaper The National Enquirer that Kubrick was killed. The director called her 2 hours before the official time of the "sudden death" and asked not to come to Hertfordshire, where, as he put it, "all of us will be poisoned so quickly that we don’t even have time to sneeze." According to British journalists, employees of the US National Security Agency for the first time tried to kill Kubrick back in 1979 year.

The violent nature of the death of Kubrick 7 in March 1999, in an English estate near Harpenden (Hertfordshire) later became the cause of his widow's revelations. In the summer of 2003, in an interview with French television, and later, 16 in November, 2003, in the program “The Dark Side of the Moon” (CBC Newsworld TV channel), the director’s widow, German actress Christiane Suslanne Harlan made a public confession, the essence of which was:

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 history as one of the best Hollywood masterpieces, 2001: Space Odyssey (1968), called 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” headed by Kubrick did. The decision on fraud was taken personally by the President of the United States.

Similar statements from the participants of the "project" were made earlier.

In particular, missile engineer Bill Keising (Will Kaysing), who worked at Rocketdyne, the company that built the rocket engines for the Apollo program, is the author of the book We have never flown to the moon. The 30 Billion Dollar American Deception "(" We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar "), released in 1974 and co-authored with Randy Reid, also stated that under the guise of a live coverage of NASA's lunar module landing spread a fake shot on Earth. For the filming was used military ground in the desert of Nevada. 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.

Daredevils were even among the astronauts themselves. So, the American astronaut Brian O'Leary (Brian O'Leary), responding to a direct question, said that "can not give 100-percent guarantee that Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin really visited the moon."

However, it is only now, after the direct confessions of Stanley Kubrick himself - the world-renowned Hollywood master of directing - that the final and bold point is set in the American lunar scam.


Directed by Stanley Kubrick, Nevada, Military Ground, 1969 Year.
Originator:
http://www.km.ru/science-tech/2015/12/13/amerikantsy-na-lune/768005-v-lunnoi-afere-ssha-postavlena-zhirnaya-tochka
843 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Engineer
    Engineer 21 December 2015 10: 31
    +4
    Well, they would also say that Saturn 5 was only in the layout? And the Apollo Union Mosfilm fiction? This is not one expedition landed. I will tell you as an engineer that such systems as, say, Abacus were developed and used to design and calculate this project. And now the whole world uses them for engineering calculations and designing and does not know that all this is one invention of a famous director.
    1. cniza
      cniza 21 December 2015 10: 34
      41
      Who needs such stuffing?
      1. 79807420129
        79807420129 21 December 2015 10: 42
        201
        Quote: cniza
        Who needs such stuffing?

        But hell knows? On the one hand, I am tormented by vague doubts, the Americans have visited the moon, and on the other hand they are buying rocket engines from us, and in the 2016 budget there is money for the purchase of our RD-180. Hollywood, however.
        1. Armored optimist
          Armored optimist 21 December 2015 10: 50
          67
          I think that if there is an 88-page confidentiality agreement, there must be material certified by a notary and stored in a seriously protected place. So, if this is true, then further disclosures must be expected. If there are none, then fake.
          1. Loreal
            Loreal 21 December 2015 10: 55
            +3
            If Stanley Kubrick filmed something this walk on the moon still does not cancel.
            1. vell.65
              vell.65 21 December 2015 11: 14
              24
              Quote: Loreal
              If Stanley Kubrick filmed something this walk on the moon still does not cancel.

              But whose walks will it be?
              1. Loreal
                Loreal 21 December 2015 11: 20
                +2
                If someone suffers less self-esteem, then the USSR could be there 5 years earlier.
                1. kenig1
                  kenig1 21 December 2015 12: 01
                  116
                  The way it is)

                  1. Loreal
                    Loreal 21 December 2015 12: 13
                    +2
                    Watch from the 23rd second laughing
                    1. GDP
                      GDP 21 December 2015 12: 33
                      186
                      I have a few questions for the lunar program
                      1. If the Americans had such wonderful engines that could deliver to the moon and return a person back to, then why now they still use our carriers?

                      Why don't they fly to the moon right now? when there are more advanced and more advanced technologies. All flights ended in the 67 year !!!!

                      2. The monkey that was launched immediately before the first manned flight to the moon died from radiation. There is almost no earth’s magnetic field ... However, none of the astronauts died of cancer, no one lost their hair, everyone returned alive and well ...
                      Where did they share the radiation? A few millimeters of aluminum casing for hard cosmic radiation is not an obstacle ...

                      3. not the most important - Lunar expeditions brought hundreds of kilograms of lunar rock to the earth. BUT from this collection almost nothing has been preserved. The Americans themselves said they were stolen ... Can you imagine how much it costs to deliver one kilogram of lunar rock? And such expensive samples were just taken and stolen at once? All other samples that the Americans gave to anyone, and these are representatives of 135 states, turned out to be a fake ...

                      The volume of lunar rock stored by the American is less than in the repositories of the USSR!

                      My opinion is that there was a moon landing, but not with a man on board ...
                      1. nvn_co
                        nvn_co 21 December 2015 13: 03
                        104
                        These are absolutely correct words !!! "My opinion - there was a moon landing, but not with a man on board"That is why the scientists of the USSR decided to study and explore space with the help of unmanned aerial vehicles. And they were faroooo not stupid, and they could give odds to many ... And even more so to the Yankees. I have nothing against NASA, a lot has been done there. cool and flying, and great, but regarding space - a lot of show-off and idle talk.
                        When I was studying, one of the professors told us that during the implementation of the Soyuz-Apollo program, it was ours who invented the information system, it was our docking unit that was used, it was ours who gave them half of the life support system ...
                        Now regarding radiation !!! Let's remember how many people died when the Chernobyl accident was liquidated! Most of the Chernobyl victims are gone! And it was 86! And they usually lived up to the age of 45 - 50 years. The father himself was there and he is no longer there. And the "great" Yankovsky astronauts almost lived up to our age ... doubtful, oh, how doubtful. Although many died under mysterious circumstances, then a car accident, then accidents ... And mostly they died with their families. I saw a model of a section of the building of one of the modules of the MIR station. Frankly, this design will not protect against such radiation. Who does not believe, we open physics and astronomy, everything is written there (the school curriculum is enough). How much "lead" did you have to carry with you?  They now carry everything heavy with us into space, and then ..., and even more so would not have coped with such masses. They may have taken off, played a few turns around the planet, while Hollywood played its soap opera on the TV, and then they kind of flew in and sat down. I think it was!
                      2. GDP
                        GDP 21 December 2015 13: 14
                        129
                        But here are some more inconsistencies in more detail:

                        1. Superfast development of superheavy rocket carrier. Moreover, after a series of unsuccessful launches, NASA immediately lands the pilots and they successfully fly to the moon. After the completion of the lunar program, all Saturns were transferred to closed (!) Museums. And until now, the United States cannot develop its own heavy rocket launcher, and the USSR, which has always been a leader in rocket science, could only do this after 30 years (Energia launcher). It’s as if there were never any Saturns operating in the USA.
                        2. Dismissal of NASA designers (including V. Fon-Brown) at the height of Apollo's successful launches.
                        3. Discrepancies in the sizes of astronauts and doors, the premises of the descent module. In addition, both astronauts after a walk on the moon had to squeeze into a cramped module, close the door (located below!), Undress, turn on the air supply and module control devices, which seemed very impossible.
                        4. Superloads on standing astronauts when landing on the moon + ultra-precise manual control.
                        5. Lack of experience in manual landing of the apparatus, and in general lack of successful testing of the landing module on Earth.
                        6. With an abundance of all possible near-Earth poses under the photo, there is no milestone in the history of the video of detaching the module in the lunar orbit, when one of the astronauts remained in the ship in orbit. In general, the absence of any experience of Americans in docking apparatuses (so far), but in those years, they snapped the docking of lunar modules in lunar orbit like seeds.
                        7. Suspiciously quick death in car accidents of most sleepwalking astronomers.
                        8. Radiation irradiation of astronauts (?!).
                        9. Radio monitoring of the Apollo flight path to the USSR was not carried out (officially confirmed). In addition, even the USSR at that time successfully imitated radio communications with the Earth on the AMS Luna, as if it were manned flights.
                        10. Reflectors installed by astronauts on the moon could well leave the AMS.
                        11. Lunar soil samples - NASA's most important trump card. But the USSR, although it received their dose for cross-analysis, did not do these analyzes (officially confirmed). Some foreign laboratories have identified an orgomic difference between American samples and Moon-16 samples for different indicators. In America itself, the claimed samples of moon soil are nowhere to be found (!), With its enormous due due surplus and huge market value (which would even have covered the cost of the entire lunar mission). At the same time, it is impossible to interrogate samples for analysis, despite the fact that even the USSR in its time without any problems handed out samples of moon soil to the right and left.
                        12. All kinds of nit-picking in videos and photos:
                        - flag in the wind;
                        - multi-shadow and light sources, including unlit sides of objects, excess glare and retouching;
                        - uncharacteristic traces on the ground;
                        - lack of loose craters under the nozzles of the module;
                        - there are no stars anywhere, despite the fact that there are a lot of photos on other neapolon with AMS;
                        - astronauts do not jump high enough and generally feel reckless, even when falling;
                        - insufficient clarity of promising landscapes with the contributing to this lack of atmosphere;
                        - much better late published photos from the early, as if deliberate belated photoshop.
                        13. And after half a century, the Moon remains unattainable, despite the clear progress in all sectors.
                        Of course, NASA experts have reasoned answers to all the attacks, there are also counterarguments of opponents to their answers, etc.
                      3. Mahmut
                        Mahmut 21 December 2015 14: 25
                        19
                        Even at school, a physics teacher told us that the most difficult thing in flying to the moon is to overcome the radiation belt that formed around the Earth due to the magnetic field. To do this, you need a lead shelter chamber. Perhaps the Americans knew about some kind of tunnel through which the belt can be passed. The broadcast of the lunar expeditions was really carried out from the moon. Otherwise, they would have been exposed immediately. But whether the broadcast was live or recorded is a big question.
                      4. samuil60
                        samuil60 21 December 2015 19: 59
                        43
                        It was enough to put the Moon into orbit, or, at worst, to land an automatic apparatus on its surface, which could broadcast the video around the world. It's not a trick at all. As one of the participants in our launches said in an interview, "We laughed at Baikonur so much that in the steppe all the gophers died." Then someone allegedly stole most of the expedition footage from NASA. Who needs them !? Using them as toilet paper is difficult; selling them - no one will buy. Again, where is common sense? Wonder Americans fly to other planets, but they can't make normal engines for orbital flights - they buy from us. And Von Braun, after the poor Fau - immediately created a miracle? And what did he do then - did he drink money?
                      5. The comment was deleted.
                      6. Patriot 1
                        Patriot 1 22 December 2015 12: 01
                        21
                        Quote: Kanatbek
                        They buy the most valuable from you - the Mi-8 rocket engines and helicopters for Afghanistan and Iraq, so that you don’t have enough for your programs!
                        Also, for pennies, they launch their spacecraft with the help of your expensive missiles, so that your Soviet stocks run out faster! Fools! Come on!

                        What is this nonsense ?? belay Russia only makes money on this and pays for its own expenses.
                      7. Kanatbek
                        Kanatbek 22 December 2015 13: 48
                        24 th
                        Pffff, stupid
                      8. GDP
                        GDP 22 December 2015 16: 12
                        21
                        The Americans did not broadcast the video from the moon! Then there was no such technology. According to NASA, everything was filmed on a regular film.
                        The originals of the film disappeared without a trace ...
                        Here is an unexpected coincidence lol
                      9. DEfindER
                        DEfindER 23 December 2015 10: 20
                        +4
                        Quote: GDP
                        The Americans did not broadcast the video from the moon! Then there was no such technology. According to NASA, everything was filmed on a regular film.

                        The broadcast was live from the moon, and even radio amateurs caught it, not to mention the TV companies. My father worked at Progress Design Bureau just at that time, and said that our military monitored all Apollo flights to the moon and back, the fact of the flight was there, but if there were people there, you can already prove it by removing the landing site on a high-resolution camera, and seeing the tracks ..
                        Quote: GDP
                        The originals of the film disappeared without a trace ...

                        Even so, there are hundreds of gigs of video material of the flight to the Moon, on the nasa website, absolutely everything is shot there, almost every step, if it is fake it is unrealistically high-quality that there is still no normal exposure ..
                        for example, Apollo 11 - 9 hours of video materials:
                        http://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3291296
                      10. GDP
                        GDP 24 December 2015 11: 25
                        +6
                        look at the broadcast of the video from the Chinese lunar rover ... the frame rate is ten times less than in the filming on the moon in the 60 of the last century ...

                        So of course there was no live broadcast from the moon ...

                        The fact that the Americans sent an aircraft to the moon, I have no doubt at all ...
                        BUT the facts say that the probability that there (in the descent module) there were pilots, at least in the first flight but the moon - is extremely small.
                2. Kanatbek
                  Kanatbek 22 December 2015 17: 00
                  +1
                  I explain for the dull: one engine is built for 8 months, then it is tested and adjusted. It takes a lot of time.
                  The same helicopter.
                  The United States buys it for $ 1 million.
                  And in Russia, the national reserves in foreign currency in American banks are enough to live comfortably. All the same, this currency, with the collapse of the dollar by the US Federal Reserve, depreciates half in half a year)))
                  Here is such arithmetic ...
                  Or more details, more details to chew?

                  In a word, I’ll say that they buy from you the most valuable for their pieces of paper, so that your army is left without helicopters, and their companions so that you can’t get out, there was nothing! And not because they don’t know how to make helicopters and rocket engines!
                3. shamil
                  shamil 22 December 2015 19: 00
                  14
                  This is called the division of labor - a more technologically advanced state sells high-tech goods to the more backward. At the same time, it receives a monetary equivalent in compensation provided (it is a reality) by the world economy. Notice Amer. dollar property is not the United States, but the owners of the Fed. At the same time, further degradation of the technical thought of foreign engineers is ensured.
                4. Kanatbek
                  Kanatbek 23 December 2015 16: 54
                  0
                  You're wrong!
                  Let's count!
                  How many new helicopters does Russia need? not less than 1000, at least.
                  How much do you have? 1000 obsolete. How much does the US have? - 20000.
                  One helicopter is under construction for 8 months. A total of 4 plants will produce 25 helicopters per year.
                  It takes 1000 years to build 40.
                  That's all the arithmetic.
                5. SPAAARTAAA
                  SPAAARTAAA 23 December 2015 20: 03
                  +7
                  Wahahaha! Judging by your logic, then we are buying up foreign cars and chirp so that the unfortunate bourgeois walked on foot and naked))))
            2. Erzya
              Erzya 22 December 2015 22: 03
              +5
              Damn, but McCain doesn’t know ...
            3. Starley from the south
              Starley from the south 23 December 2015 01: 53
              18
              Quote: Kanatbek
              In a word, I’ll say that they buy from you the most valuable for their pieces of paper, so that your army is left without helicopters, and their companions so that you can’t get out, there was nothing!

              What a brilliant thought! You open our eyes! Only the Americans can come up with the idea to buy helicopters from us, that we ourselves did not have them! Brilliant! .. Laugh to the harsh stomach! ..
              You would at least ask how many and what kind of helicopters and rocket engines we have in the country, look genius with stupidity and disperse.
          2. The comment was deleted.
  2. yehat
    yehat 21 December 2015 23: 21
    +8
    1 more fact - calculation of the time of the astronaut's fall after the jump
    It’s no secret that gravity is significantly different, acceleration is different, jump time is different by about 2.5 times. On frames this is not.
  3. Fantazer911
    Fantazer911 5 January 2019 20: 17
    0
    + to all, when shooting, the film would light up and there would be no pictures at all
  4. alexey alexeyev_2
    alexey alexeyev_2 28 March 2020 04: 33
    +1
    At one time, I also firmly believed in the flight of amers to the moon .. at a session (I studied at the Ukp Aviation Institute Alma-ata) I met the guys who served in Baikonur. So they even then said that Amer’s flights of poppycock are complete. 83 year .. Yes I myself later became convinced of this ... I was a witness once. At the airport in Aktyubinsk I worked there then dragged a capsule deflated from the station. I don’t remember which one it flew there. So it was all charred and charred. Compare with the landing capsule of Amers, like brand new .. Yes, and at the time of the splashdown, it should be shrouded in clubs of steam. Where all this.
  5. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 15: 02
    23
    Quote: nvn_co
    This is how much “lead” you had to carry with you?

    not how much.
    You need to know physics and mathematics based on grade 9

    Quote: opus

    Van Allen radiation belt (internal and external) altitudes of 4000 and 17000 km


    4000km protons with tens of MeV energy;
    17000 km is an external radiation belt at an altitude mainly of electrons with energies of tens of keV.
    a person can stop "working" after 500-1000 glad

    1 Rad = 100 erg / g = 0,01 J / kg = 0,01 Gy.
    1 eV = 1,602 176 6208 (98) · 10−19 J = 1,602 176 6208 (98) · 10 ^ −12 erg.
    10МэВ=10*10^6 *1,602 176 6208(98)·10^−12 эрг=1,602 176 6208(98)·10^−5эрг,т.е.0,16 микроэрг.
    0,16 microergs per 80 kg of weight ...... less than 12,8 microrad.
    This is nothing for a weekly flight.
    And taking into account the skin (absorbs protons, electrons) - the secondary radiation is minuscule.
    don't bald

    1. The proton belt is located approximately 500 kilometers above the Earth's surface and extends over 13000 km. This inner belt contains protons with energies that are large, than 10 million evolts.
    [Center[/ Center]
    2. An electronic belt of low energy (in fact, it covers the volume of space where there is a proton belt). Electrons carry from 1 to 5 million evolts of energy, on average.

    3. The high-energy electronic belt is farther than two overlapping internal belts, and in the figure it is purple. The electrons in this outer belt have an average of 10 to 100 million eVt of energy.



    There is a Brazilian magnetic anomaly at heights of 300km,


    there astronauts can grab a huge ogo (Dzhemeni4)


    about 2 mRems of extra dose each time they pass through SAA. In one day they can accumulate a 30 mber dosage. During the week, this adds up to 7 x 30 = 210 mRems the value of which is slightly lower than the dosage that they receive at the first level for one year (about 350mRem).

    And when flying to the moon, the effect lasted only about 30 minutes, which is actually actually inside the Apollo spacecraft a little more than the total dose received by astronauts when flying on the Shuttles.
  6. andj61
    andj61 21 December 2015 16: 50
    15
    Quote: opus
    Quote: nvn_co
    This is how much “lead” you had to carry with you?
    not how much.
    You need to know physics and mathematics based on grade 9

    All right - good , but only the information you provided far extends beyond the school curriculum. There, only radiation belts are mentioned - and that’s it.
  7. Corsair
    Corsair 21 December 2015 18: 39
    17
    Quote: opus
    And when flying to the moon, the effect lasted only about 30 minutes, which is actually actually inside the Apollo spacecraft a little more than the total dose received by astronauts when flying on the Shuttles.

    Quote: andj61
    Everything is right - good, but only the information you provided far goes beyond the school course.

    what What radiation do you think is only in the radiation belt of the Earth? Solar radiation does not spread anywhere and almost 400 thousand km the ship flies in absolutely clean space? No random flashes and solar activity with good gamma radiation.
    In addition, pictures and calculations from you are the same as the same thoughts of another person.
    http://ligaspace.my1.ru/news/2010-02-06-217
    - who, with his calculations, came to the conclusion that the Americans did not fly to the moon, but most likely circled in low orbits.
  8. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 23: 58
    +6
    Quote: Corsair
    What radiation do you think is only in the radiation belt of the Earth?

    The radiation from the Van Allen belts depends on the solar wind. They, as it were, "focus and concentrate" this radiation in themselves.



    Curiosity has an on-board RAD instrument to measure radiation exposure. During its flight to Mars, Curiosity measured the background radiation.


    The result is not encouraging (for people traveling to Mars) - the equivalent dose of absorbed radiation is 2 times the dose of the ISS. And in four - the one that is considered the maximum permissible for nuclear power plants.


    That is a six-month flight to Mars is approximately equivalent to 1 year spent in low Earth orbit or two at a nuclear power plant.


    For humans, the accumulated radiation of 1 Sievert increases the risk of cancer by 5%. NASA allows its astronauts to gain no more than 3% risk or 0,6 Sievert during their career. Taking into account the fact that the daily dose on the ISS is up to 1 mSv, the astronauts' maximum stay in orbit is limited to approximately 600 days for the entire career.

    Peaks occur in solar flares. It happens and 2 miles Sievert (mZV)

    ================================================== =======
    8 days 3 hours 18 minutes 18 seconds compared to 6 months?
    Well, about 0, 0869 dose from the maximum permissible for NPP employees(for 0,5 years)
    “Radiation Safety Standards 76/87” (NRB - 76/87):
    When irradiating the whole body and for the I group of critical organs, the SDA value of 50 mSv (5 rem) per year was established. For II and III groups of critical organs, traffic rules are 150 and 300 mSv (15 and 30 rem) per year, respectively.

    those. 0,0869 * 0,5 * 50mSv = 2,1739 mSV.
    A lot?

    on the ISS, the daily dose is up to 1 mSv
  9. GDP
    GDP 22 December 2015 16: 50
    10
    The answer then is on the 1 question:

    The cost of launching into orbit 1 kg payload for the space shuttle is 5 times lower than for the older 5 saturn!
    Why, then, do Americans use more expensive carriers than the incredibly effective 5 Saturn !!!

    Why do not they launch for example into orbit a monoblock analogue of the ISS? After all, such an economic benefit ????
  10. heal
    heal 24 December 2015 10: 27
    +1
    Now read what you wrote:
    1.
    Quote: GDP
    The cost of launching into orbit 1 kg payload for the space shuttle is 5 times lower than for the older 5 saturn!

    2.
    Quote: GDP
    Why, then, do Americans use more expensive carriers than the incredibly effective 5 Saturn !!!


    So after all, in your opinion, if 1 kg on the Shuttle is more expensive or cheaper than on the Saturn? And then in one case so, in another - commercials.
  11. Starley from the south
    Starley from the south 23 December 2015 02: 28
    11
    My dear man, all your reasoning with graphs and pictures does not give much, there is almost no essence there. What RAD bands did it work in? And do not tell me that in all and that his sensitivity is high, this will not be true. And the ISS flies under the protection of the Earth's magnetic field, which deflects the flows of charged particles to the poles. At a great distance from the Earth, beyond the zone of action of the magnetic field (or where it is very weak), the astronauts no longer protect anything from space, only the lining of the ship. A comparison with nuclear power plants is incorrect, because there is neutron radiation.
    And returning to our rams. If the Americans flew to the moon, why did they return alive? I admit that they did not receive a lethal dose of radiation there, on the Moon, but then they did not have life support systems that could function normally under such conditions. After all, they did not conduct tests ... Or "conducted", but classified?
  12. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 23: 51
    0
    Quote: andj61
    There, only radiation belts are mentioned - and that’s it.

    Well, I went too slightly ...
    request


  13. Asadullah
    Asadullah 21 December 2015 22: 54
    +6
    not how much.
    You need to know physics and mathematics based on grade 9


    What are you saying !!! And what, in the ninth grade they did not say that the study of both the Van Allen belts and Vernov-Chudakov’s belts was not of an academic nature. Information about them is absolutely contradictory taken from different aircraft. The effects of flashes of both the solar wind and the Earth's magnetic field can change configuration and diffraction phenomena are completely unpredictable. That the problems in the electronic circuits of the returned aircraft reached such a magnitude that the impression was created of the presence of devices in a nuclear reactor. It is precisely because of these phenomena that an orbit five hundred km high is considered almost extreme for inhabited aircraft.
  14. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 00: 22
    +1
    Quote: Asadullah
    That the problems in the electronic circuits of the returned aircraft reached such a value,

    what's serious?


    Space - radiation-resistant microcircuit for space use - metal-ceramic case.
    We have (had!) Acceptance 9.

    Electrons, gamma and x-ray radiation: in the gate gate dielectric of transistors, the charge begins to gradually accumulate, and accordingly the parameters of the transistors begin to slowly change - the threshold voltage of the transistors and the leakage current.

    An ordinary civilian digital microcircuit can stop working normally after 5000 rad. A person "stops working" after 500-1000 rad.
    65nm Space microcircuits routinely withstand exposure in 1 million glad


    5000rad (1 rad = dose of radiation per 1 kg of body weight, equivalent to an energy of 0.01 joules.) This is 50 sievert (1 Sv = 1 J / kg = 100 rem.)
    On the ISS per day (!), The daily dose is up to 1 mSv (the astronauts' maximum stay in orbit is limited to about 600 days for the whole career). NASA standard: for a person, the accumulated radiation of 1 Sievert increases the risk of cancer by 5%. NASA allows its astronauts in their career, gain no more than 3% risk or 0,6 Sievert.

    TZCH - protons, alpha particles and high-energy ions .. have such high energy that they “pierce” the microcircuit through (together with the satellite’s body) and leave a “loop” of charge behind them. In the best case this can lead to a software error (0 become 1 or vice versa - single-event upset, SEU), in the worst case it can lead to thyristor latching (single-event latchup, SEL).

    Output ==> triple-well process, microcircuits on a sapphire substrate (Silicon-on-sapphire, SOS, more generally Silicon-on-insulator, SOI), current firing
    Historically, in the USSR and Russia they worked more with silicon on sapphire (they did not count money)
    the optimum thickness against the TZCh is about 2-3mm Aluminum.
    Everything else is meaningless: galactic cosmic rays sometimes send us particles with an energy of 300000000 TeV ... When such a particle collides with, for example, a lead atom of radiation protection, it simply tears it to shreds. The fragments will also have gigantic energy, and will also tear to shreds everything in their path. Ultimately - the thicker the protection of heavy elements - the more fragments and secondary radiation we get.


    Neutrons + 10B (boron): for a long time they use only 11B isotope for the production of microcircuits
  15. yehat
    yehat 21 December 2015 23: 28
    19
    these calculations are not an indisputable fact - only one of the theories.
    Therefore, it is not worth talking about too certain conclusions.
    Theoretically, there is a possibility that they could have a small window.
    but if you put together all the probabilities of the problems, it turns out a bit too much.
    I do not believe that the Americans were so wildly lucky - with the design of the rocket, when they suddenly "overtook" the USSR by literally a quarter of a century, having an engineering staff is not at all better, with the reliability of systems, they definitely did not have a normal docking system in orbit (their development was frankly, too heavy and unreliable) well, etc. You can count about 20 key points where they were suddenly wildly lucky.
    It doesn’t happen, in space it happens exactly the opposite - astronauts die due to all petty nonsense, not to mention serious problems.
  16. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 00: 29
    +4
    Quote: yehat
    when they suddenly "overtook" the USSR by literally a quarter of a century, having an engineering staff is no better

    1. The richest country in the world.
    2. Do not fight at any time on its territory (the infrastructure is intact).
    3. All the best minds (except ours) from them, the whole world.
    80-90% of their patents
    4. Rich stocks of raw materials, right under your feet
    5. There is no cold, do not spend 40% on heating. The highest specific and absolute component in energy.
    6. Closer to the equator - lower costs for the withdrawal of 1 kg of cargo into orbit.
    7. Absolutely other distances (Moscow-TyuraTam ..... you cross America 3 times). Production capacities are mainly in the west, near the cosmodromes
    8. The world's best chemical industry.
    9. The world's best electronic industry.
    10. Fantastic technological base, as an example:
    For the entire period of World War II, the volume of commercial shipbuilding amounted to 5091 vessel with a total carrying capacity of more than 38 million barrels of ton, and more than 1941 ships and auxiliary vessels (with a total displacement of over 1945 million tons) were built for the Navy from 1500 to 4,5, including 561 patrol ships (including high-speed landing transports converted from patrol ships), 389 destroyers (including high-speed mine loaders converted from destroyers), 217 submarines, about 60 aircraft carriers70 auxiliary vessels, 34 light cruisers, 15 heavy cruisers.

    The Germans and Japanese drowned several times less than they launched into the water, over the same period of time
    Quote: yehat
    so wildly lucky

    We were lucky: we managed, got ahead, and this is after the Second World War: the whole country is in ruins
  17. GDP
    GDP 22 December 2015 16: 32
    10
    1. If the United States is the richest and best country in the world, then why didn’t they fly into space first, didn’t they launch the first satellite, the first orbital station, didn’t they make the first manned spacewalk, etc ...? Why do not these engines use their own? Why buy from us? The program for creating engines for heavy carriers is in full swing with the Americans, billions of dollars are being spent while the TTX of an undeveloped rocket is worse than that of the Saturn 5, allegedly developed in the 60 of the last century !!!

    2. The radiation level in the Van Allen belt according to the measurements of Soviet scientists is significantly higher than that of the Americans.
    + Radiation in the belt constantly jumps periodically going through the roof to a deadly level. I can’t believe that the Americans are such risky people and they are so incredibly lucky for 4 times in a row that they slipped through all the peaks ...
    So your statistics with all these schemes are not so much worth. I saw exactly the same tables and graphs proving exactly the opposite ....
  18. Lev Leshchenko
    Lev Leshchenko 22 December 2015 16: 51
    +5
    The radiation level in the Van Allen belt according to the measurements of Soviet scientists is significantly higher than that of the Americans.


    Very significant.

    Note the fact that the radiation effect is 1-2 orders of magnitude higher than that given by the official NASA report for Apollo missions.

    So for Apollo 13, the absorbed dose value is 0,24 rad. The calculation gives a value of ~ 34,5 rad, this is 144 times more. At the same time, the radiation effect almost doubles with a decrease in effective protection from 7,5 to 1,5 g / cm2, while the NASA report indicates the opposite.

    For Apollo 8 and Apollo 11, the official radiation doses are 0,16 and 0,18 rad, respectively. The calculation gives 19,4 rad. This is 121 and 108 times less, respectively.

    And only for Apollo 14 the official radiation dose is 1,14 rad, which is 17 less than the calculated one.

    http://oko-planet.su/science/sciencecosmos/225516-chelovek-na-lune-dozy-radiacii

    -pri-polete-na-lunu.html
  19. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 17: 23
    -8
    Quote: GDP
    1. If the USA is the richest and best country in the world

    What are the doubts?

    Quote: GDP
    then they didn’t fly into space first, didn’t they launch the first satellite, the first orbital station, didn’t they make the first manned spacewalk, etc ...?

    already said:
    Quote: opus
    We were lucky: we managed, got ahead, and this is after the Second World War: the whole country is in ruins

    Incandescent lamp (Edison), telephone and telegraph, first plane (Wright brothers), television (Zvorykin), nuclear (1945) and thermonuclear weapons, first liquid fuel rocket (Goddard) , a personal computer and the Internet, a mobile phone, a rocket for flying people to the moon (Brown), four stations that left the solar system, antibiotics (saving the lives of millions). aerospace plane (1981) Shuttle. Hubble Orbital Telescope.

    Quote: GDP
    Why buy from us?

    Already said




  20. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 17: 29
    -3
    Quote: GDP
    2. The radiation level in the Van Allen belt according to measurements by Soviet scientists

    Quote: Lev Leshchenko
    Very significant.

    Stop repeating this crap (some kind of fool printed 4, and repeats like a mantra)

    GIVE "measurements of Soviet scientists"
    Weak?
    Quote: Lev Leshchenko
    So for Apollo 13, the absorbed dose value is 0,24 rad. The calculation gives a value of ~ 34,5 rad, this is 144 times more.

    fool




  21. Lev Leshchenko
    Lev Leshchenko 22 December 2015 18: 12
    +9
    GIVE "measurements of Soviet scientists"
    Weak?

    Worry about nothing.
    I provided a link to the source of the quote in my message.

    Stop repeating this crap (some kind of fool printed 4, and repeats like a mantra)


    It was hard for me to judge how difficult it was for the little fellow (not an astrophysicist), but your arguments do not look more convincing than these.

    If you can directly indicate the discrepancy and clearly explain, I will be grateful. Swearing is not an argument.
  22. opus
    opus 23 December 2015 00: 03
    -3
    Quote: Lev Leshchenko
    Worry about nothing.

    Do you have that complex?
    who was that worried?
    Quote: Lev Leshchenko
    I provided a link to the source of the quote in my message

    For the stubborn:
    I bring the same signs, just think about them
    - I don't need a reference to the "eye-planets" global public -political portal.
    You give data
    Quote: GDP
    according to the measurements of Soviet scientists

    Or rather, not YOU, but homo GDP
    Measurements.
    Quote: Lev Leshchenko
    but your arguments do not look more convincing than these.

    Well yours then: 100% guarantee.
    My opinion: you are re-posting the data does not even understand what it is about, and Ziver is hardly distinguishable from rem
    Quote: Lev Leshchenko
    If you can directly indicate the discrepancy and clearly explain, I will be grateful. Swearing is not an argument.

    In my opinion, I have already explained everything "Plus" / "divide" to multiply.
    Everything is so clear.
    and on the eye, another "scientific" bullet about the moon.

    repeat
    Well, how can you draw conclusions (where is the logic, where?): The basis of the calculations are the parameters of the giant surge of 1991 SA.In 1991 !!!.
    They cannot be used to calculate radiation doses for much weaker events, and for a much earlier period (1967-1972)


    And even with such a stretch, the author-DO NOT LITTLE (Velor number 2 - I personally velor 7 corrections of the message, corrected quickly)
    ------------------------

    Well, if there is:
    Quote: GDP
    The radiation level in the Van Allen belt according to the measurements of Soviet scientists significantly higher
    let him present, but does not carry nonsense
  23. Lev Leshchenko
    Lev Leshchenko 23 December 2015 02: 34
    +4
    Quote: opus
    Well yours then: 100% guarantee.


    These are not my arguments, but they are interesting.

    I bring the table on which you rely.
    The author of my calculations gives a clear commentary on her, which calls into question either the adequacy of the data on radiation doses received by Apollo astronauts, or the fact of flights to the Moon:

    It can be noted that Apollo radiation doses of 0,022-0,114 rad / day, received by astronauts allegedly during a flight to the Moon, do not differ from radiation doses of 0,010-0,153 rad / day during orbital flights. The influence of the radiation belt of the Earth (its seasonal nature, magnetic storms and features of solar activity) is zero. While during a real flight to the moon according to the NASA scheme, radiation doses cause a 50-500 times greater effect than in the Earth’s orbit.

    It can also be noted that the lowest radiation effect of 0,010-0,020 rad / day is observed for the ISS orbital station, which has an effective protection twice as high as Apollo's - 15 g / cm2 and is in a low reference orbit of the Earth. The highest radiation doses of 0,099-0,153 rad / day were noted for the Skylab OS, which has the same protection as the Apollo - 7,5 g / cm2, and flew in a high reference orbit of 480 km near the Van Allen radiation belt.


    I can't vouch for the author's assessment of this commentary (about "cause 50-500 times greater effect"), since I'm not a specialist, but on the whole the idea is clear and sober: Apollo astronauts in their travels received radiation doses comparable to those received during orbital flights. The highest doses were received on Skylabs flying near the radiation belt.

    If there is anything to argue on the merits, in a similar vein, you are welcome.
  24. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 19: 16
    11
    In vain you persist. There are other indicators that make it clear that they were not on the moon, and did not spend long flights. Tales are all. The USSR knew how to keep secrets, even having entered into a conspiracy in the matter of flying to the moon. The states did not know about the effect of weightlessness on the human body. Photographs have been preserved of how tired astronauts pace along the deck of a ship, as they peer out gaily from the window of their quarantine house. And they didn’t know that after 5 days of weightlessness, a person cannot stand because of gravity. And this secret was hidden from the Americans even after the Soyuz-Apollo flight. The first was Gagarin with a 1,5 hour flight. And the first astronaut how long was in flight - 15 min. From the force reached 120 km and down. And the second astronaut? He is certainly more, for 15 seconds. And this is in 1961. And already in 1969 - victory, on the moon! Fairy tales. It doesn’t happen
  25. opus
    opus 23 December 2015 00: 13
    -2
    Quote: shamil
    In vain you persist. There are other indicators

    1. I persist against stupidity
    2. There are no other indicators.
    Quote: shamil
    And this is in 1961. And already in 1969 - victory, on the moon! Fairy tales. It doesn’t happen

    yep
    I advise you to get acquainted with the essence of the issue:

    THEN:

    mission of the Apollo / Saturn 204 (AS-204). In preparation for the first manned flight under the Apollo program, scheduled for February 21, 1967, a severe fire occurred on board the ship and the entire crew died. The fire occurred on January 27, 1967.

    Apollo 7, launched on October 11, 1968, was the first manned spacecraft launched under the Apollo program. It was an eleven-day orbit of the Earth

    21 декабря 1968 года Apollo 8 was launched, and on December 24 it entered the orbit of the moon, having completed the first manned overflight of the moon in the history of mankind.

    March 3, 1969 Apollo 9 was launched, during this flight was made A FULL simulation of a flight to the moon in Earth orbit.

    On May 18, 1969, the Apollo 10 was sent into space; during this flight to the moon, a "dress rehearsal" of the landing on the moon was held.

    THE FINISH:
    16 July 1969 year Apollo 11 launched. July 20 at 20 hours 17 minutes 42 seconds GMT the lunar module landed in the Sea of ​​Tranquility. Neil Armstrong descended to the surface of the moon on July 21, 1969 at 02 hours 56 minutes 20 seconds GMT, having made the first moon landing in the history of mankind.

    But this "happens"?with 1961 on 1969 (8 years) a bunch of starts, giant finance ...

    And think about the USSR (destroyed by a 4-year war), from scratch, in 1958 it was able to launch (with difficulty) a satellite weighing 100g, and ALREADY AFTER 3 (!) Years, send Gagarin into orbit.
    Does it "happen"?
  26. shamil
    shamil 23 December 2015 06: 05
    +5
    Thanks to enlightened them, it was even worse. And the USSR was engaged in rocketry even before the war. One of the side effects is Katyusha. And about flying to the moon, no matter how hard you try, you can't foresee everything. Especially if you don't know where to lay the straw. The Americans did not know about the effect of prolonged weightlessness on a person, therefore, multi-day flights are also crap.
    Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  27. opus
    opus 23 December 2015 19: 04
    -2
    Quote: shamil
    Thanks to enlightened them, it was even worse. And the USSR was engaged in missile technology even before the war. One of the side effects is Katyusha.

    1. Much better (until 1936), in 1945, after meeting with the FAU-2 (what I wrote about) they made up, much better and more than in the USSR
    -Goddard conducted his first experiments on launching liquid-fuel rockets in 1926.

    -December 30, 1930, American professor Robert Hitchings Goddard launched a liquid fuel rocket, which had 3 m in length and weight of 15 kg, which rose to a height of about 600 m at a maximum speed of over 800 km / h.
    - Two years later, on April 19, he launched the first guided missile, in which control was carried out using gas rudders and a gyroscope. At the end of September 1932, a patent was issued for this device No. 1879187. However, the professor did not stop there.

    -March 28, 1935 Goddard launched a rocket with gyroscopic stabilization, the flight range of which was about 4 km, the maximum height of about 1,5 km.
    On May 31st, 1935, a liquid rocket was launched with a launch weight of 26 kg, which reached a height of 2,2 km, and on October 14, 1935, a rocket weighing 38 kg reached a height of 0,4 km.

    In 1936, at the California Institute of Technology, a group of researchers founded a kind of rocket society on the initiative of Dr. Theodore Carman.

    This group included Frank Malina, Zhu-shen Jiang, A.M. Smith, John Parsons, Edward Forman and Weld Arnold.



    2.About "Katyusha"
    T34 (Sherman Calliope) - M4A1 or M4A3 tank equipped with a tower mounted multiple launch rocket system T34 Calliope, with 60 tube guides for 114 mm M8 missiles

    Missiles M8A3 (M8): The first ground tests of missiles conducted May 1941 of the year, which, on the whole, went smoothly and almost exactly a year later, in June 1942, it began testing it from the side of the P-40 fighter. In 1943, a missile that received the standard army designation M8 was launched into mass production the total output from 1942 to 1945 amounted to over 2.5 million units (!!!!!) in various versions.



  28. shamil
    shamil 23 December 2015 20: 48
    +2
    Well, what is it about? Yes, and the United States engaged in missiles. And your video was evaluated by a meeting of the Apollo 13 crew? Thank you for the video. There is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people by cutting $ 20 billion.
  29. opus
    opus 23 December 2015 23: 16
    -2
    Quote: shamil
    Well, what is it about? Yes, and the United States engaged in missiles.

    someone recently claimed:
    Quote: shamil
    Thanks to enlightened them, it was even worse. And the USSR was engaged in rocketry even before the war. One of the side effects is "Katyusha"

    Quote: shamil
    There is a puncture on a puncture:

    Here with Gagarin is the same trouble (according to the standards, it would be like the first flight into space in the World (not in a capsule, but separately) ......







    So what ?
    Now, how stubborn will I say that quilted jackets have made a movie and they are talking nonsense about Gagarin to the whole world?
    But it was necessary (according to the rules)


    So what?
    Quote: shamil
    the lander glistens

    ?
    Scuffed and burnt to impossible

    just different TK and ablation coatings, different approach.

    A SC Apollo is inhibited / extinguishes energy in the atmosphere Larger base of truncated cone.
    What is pictured in water
  30. Kersy
    Kersy 13 January 2019 11: 48
    0
    The mass of the satellite was not 100 g, but 83,6 kg!
  31. RDX
    RDX 22 December 2015 17: 11
    +3
    But how then are they going to organize a flight to Mars? how are they now protected from radiation?
  32. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 17: 35
    -4
    Quote: RDX
    But how then are they going to organize a flight to Mars? how are they now protected from radiation?

    This argument does not apply to our EPA ** (maydanutnye in our).
    The Americans could not, so someone farted.
    And they will repeat this mantra ad infinitum.
    Although there are problems on Mars:


    The result is not inspiring (for people traveling to Mars)




    6 months (6 * 30 = 180 days) is not 8 days.
    Ionizing radiation is important not power, but the accumulated dose (duration of stay in the zone).
  33. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 19: 20
    +3
    The more you think about it, the strange thoughts come. At one time, we agreed with the CPSU and played a flight to the moon before the world. No one bothers to repeat. And the money is cut in half. Yes, and better to Mars. There, at least no one will ask, where is the trace of the first person?
  34. Starley from the south
    Starley from the south 23 December 2015 01: 41
    +2
    Lead, by the way, will not protect against hard radiation. This is from the university program. He will simply translate this radiation into not so hard, but also dangerous. Therefore, for effective protection, lead alone is not enough, it is necessary to assemble a more complex and expensive multilayer structure. But about the deadly corpuscular radiation on the moon, one ambiguity arises: yes, there is no magnetic field on the moon, then why did our experts not expose the American lunar scam even then, at least in the 1980 year, when we knew more about radiation than the 15 years before ?
  35. shamil
    shamil 23 December 2015 06: 07
    +4
    Read above. After Stalin, all our leaders were opportunists - the thaw, detente, perestroika ... They were in the share with the Americans.
  36. n.kolesnichenko
    n.kolesnichenko 23 December 2015 21: 30
    +2
    I was at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in 1886 - from May to October (2,5 terms) I received more than 50 BER and went through ALL business trips to Chechnya from 1994 to 2001, retired at the age of 50 as a colonel and .... is alive to this day
  37. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 14: 34
    0
    Quote: GDP
    there were such wonderful engines that could deliver to the moon and return a person back, why now they still use our carriers?

    The engine and the carrier are two big differences.
    1. They have engines

    (RD-180 and K-33 are simply cheaper than theirs)

    2. The carriers are the same

    In addition to the controversial flights to the Moon, they launched Voyagers, mariners, Hubbles, Shuttles, Skylabs, NEAR Shoemaker station, Cassini station, Stardust station, MESSENGER station, etc.
    And all this is not S. Kubrick’s fantasies.
    Quote: GDP
    2. The monkey that was launched immediately before the first manned flight to the moon died from radiation. There is almost no earth’s magnetic field ... However, none of the astronauts died of cancer, no one lost their hair, everyone returned alive and well ...

    1. A monkey named Bonnie, launched in 1969, felt bad in orbit and died on her return to Earth.
    The rest is an accident, suffocation, not a parachute opening, etc.
    Shl. "Soviet" turtles set a 90-day record for the stay of animals in space (aboard the Salyut-5 orbital station) - no problem

    2. Van Allen radiation belt (internal and external) altitudes of 4000 and 17000 km
    4000km protons with energy tens of MeV;
    17000 km - external radiation belt at an altitude mainly of electrons with energy tens of keV.
    a person can stop "working" after 500-1000 glad

    1 Rad = 100 erg / g = 0,01 J / kg = 0,01 Gy.
    1 eV = 1,602 176 6208 (98) · 10−19 J = 1,602 176 6208 (98) · 10 ^ −12 erg.
    10 MeV = 10 * 10 ^6 *1,602 176 6208(98)·10^−12 эрг=1,602 176 6208(98)·10^−5erg, i.e., 0,16 microerg.
    0,16 microerg per 80 kg of weight ...... less than 12,8 microrad.
    This is nothing for a weekly flight.
    And taking into account the skin (absorbs protons, electrons) - the secondary radiation is minuscule.
    don't bald
    Quote: GDP
    Lunar expeditions brought hundreds of kilograms of lunar rock to the earth. BUT from this collection almost nothing has been preserved.

    contradicts
    Quote: GDP
    Lunar volume breed kept by an american less than in the repositories of the USSR!
  38. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 14: 44
    -1
    From 1969 to 1972, about 382 kg of lunar matter were delivered to Earth by American astronauts.

    83% of this mass is kept intact for future research at the Johnson Space Center, and they are not treated directly, but through special tools.





    Quote: GDP
    My opinion is that there was a moon landing, but not with a man on board ...

    It would be desirable to reinforce this opinion by weight.
    And it turns out that our special services, the apologists of the communist system, reputable scientists and astronauts, millions of viewers and thousands of hundreds at the start, as well as the U.S. Navy / Air Force rescuers that were involved in pulling the capsules, laughed.



    Yes, and the means (OUR, Europe) of objective control (communication, radar) the same
  39. andj61
    andj61 21 December 2015 17: 09
    +9
    Quote: opus
    Yes, and the means (OUR, Europe) of objective control (communication, radar) the same

    Just the people who worked in our MCCU at that time confirm that the Americans really flew there, and our flight was monitored. I agree with you - it is very doubtful that everyone would go wrong!
  40. Corsair
    Corsair 21 December 2015 18: 49
    23
    Quote: opus
    Yes, and the means (OUR, Europe) of objective control (communication, radar) the same

    laughing Why did they immediately go nuts? most likely agreed - concluded a pact, so to speak. Americans showed a Hollywood show - ours agreed and put an end to, most likely agreed not to disclose this action - the emphasis was on blackmail or some kind of mutually beneficial deal.

  41. Albert1988
    Albert1988 21 December 2015 20: 03
    +2
    Quote: Corsair
    most likely agreed - concluded a pact, so to speak. the Americans showed a Hollywood show - ours agreed and put an end to, most likely agreed not to disclose this action - the emphasis was on blackmail or some kind of mutually beneficial deal.

    Yeah, we agreed, as they say, "ten times" - in the midst of a cold win, if we really received data that there were no amers on the moon, they would not fail to replicate this to the whole world with detailed technical evidence, because the American flight to the moon became a colossal plus for the Amers and a huge blow to our national prestige, moreover, relations were quite tense then - these are not Gorbachev's times, so the fact that ours could know that this was a fake, and it is very unlikely to be silent ...
  42. Nikolay K
    Nikolay K 22 December 2015 00: 18
    -8
    And if the Americans were mutually compromising, for example, about the first flight into space?
  43. Albert1988
    Albert1988 22 December 2015 07: 25
    +2
    Ugum, that is, Gagarin did not fly into space?
    Old song, not interesting ...
  44. CTEPX
    CTEPX 22 December 2015 07: 12
    +7
    Quote: Albert1988
    if in reality ours had received data that there were no amers on the moon, then they would not have failed to replicate this to the whole world with detailed technical evidence

    It was at the beginning of the seventies that some of the members of the CPSU Central Committee and part of the KGB leadership began to operate in huge amounts in foreign currency. From here the shadow people went, from here the betrayal of the elites grew, which led to the collapse of the Union.
    So the roots of the "lunar scam", oh, how deep))
  45. Vorodis_vA
    Vorodis_vA 23 December 2015 20: 03
    +4
    at that time, the USSR’s drain was deliberately started, otherwise the meaning from the Cold Wars, and they both knew that there would be no war, here and the adoption of the dollar instead of the external ruble after the death of Stalin, and permission to oborty in the Bolshevik style for collapse, and the collapse of agriculture and unnecessary vaccinations on whose instructions it is not clear whose recognition of AIDS is gradual (some countries still do not recognize) and the rewriting of the definition-alcohol is poison, and the abolition of pederasty disease, and Khrushchev corn and flights to the moon and gave Crimea a lot ...
  46. Nikolay K
    Nikolay K 22 December 2015 00: 16
    0
    And I hold the same opinion. Versions of the Hollywood origin of the lunar expedition appeared in the 70's. Ours would not fail to promote this version in order to kick the box office enemy. However, at the official level, we did not show any doubts, the question is why.
  47. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 01: 23
    -3
    Quote: Corsair
    ours agreed

    such a chance to justify the Americans falls apart.
    And do not use it?
    All the more
    What two know, the pig knows. (Muller, “Seventeen Moments of Spring”)

    Quote: Nikolai K
    And if the Americans were mutually compromising, for example, about the first flight into space?

    after the satellite and Gagarin’s flight into space, they would have fallen right away without thinking: the whole world mocked the arrogant Yankees.
    ==========================================
    Remember Bill and Monica's Ten Sex Stories?
  48. Corsair
    Corsair 22 December 2015 10: 57
    +5
    Quote: opus
    Remember Bill and Monica's Ten Sex Stories?

    laughing You don’t confuse the warm with the soft - Bill merged your own, apparently it was too soft, or some other military project was wrapped up. America is a country of concerns.
    If Stalin (Khrushchev in the end) would have been crap in full of amers, and Brezhnevskaya, the whole rag-tag was already working in full on the collapse of the USSR. They lacked "mozzarella, Bordeaux and summer cottages on warm seas", plus clothes with foreign cars. These people bought cheap in the 90s for jeans and chewing gum, these same figures stole a lot of money for the "hillock", you really can't take them to the next world, but who of them thinks about it during his lifetime?
  49. Asadullah
    Asadullah 21 December 2015 22: 58
    +2
    From 1969 to 1972, about 382 kg of lunar matter were delivered to Earth by American astronauts.


    laughing laughing Yes you’re a comedian, my friend! Chasing the American lunar soil for almost twenty years, well, some fakes come across. By the way, do you collect comics? I advise ....
  50. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 00: 38
    -7
    Quote: Asadullah
    I advise ....



    chase further: on the earth under 8 million people, it is difficult to divide 000 kg of LH into them.



    "Infrared transmission spectra of regolith from the sea of ​​tranquility" M.V. Akhmanova, AV Karjakin, LS Tarasov, p. 525 "Lunar soil from the sea of ​​abundance".


    "The authors had samples" - is the meaning clear?

    You can read the full here (in Russian)


    You can analyze the tuta (in English):


  51. guzik007
    guzik007 22 December 2015 09: 38
    +3
    Yes, and the means (OUR, Europe) of objective control (communication, radar) the same
    -------------------------------------------------- ---
    Personally, I believe the authority of cosmonaut Leonov. And he confirmed the fact of the presence of amers on the moon.
  52. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 20: 10
    +5
    I also want to believe, so I honestly believe that he remains faithful to the perpetual subscription on non-disclosure of truth given by the CPSU and the KGB.
  53. Old old
    Old old 23 December 2015 00: 11
    +2
    From 1969 to 1972, about 382 kg of lunar matter were delivered to Earth by American astronauts.
    83% of this mass is kept intact for future research at the Johnson Space Center, and is not handled directly, but through special tools.


    "In articles published in the collection, several American researchers mention how much the Americans received Soviet lunar soil, and mention that these samples were obtained in exchange for American ones, say:" The lunar matter investigated in this paper is part of the material provided by NASA , which was received by exchange from the USSR in July 1971 (3 g) "(SE Haggerty) [43]. But no American mentions how much lunar material the USA transferred to the USSR in exchange for 3,2 g. it is quite strange that none of the 51 Soviet research groups, whose articles are included in the collection “Lunar Soil from the Sea of ​​Abundance.” A military secret?

    The secret is secret, but 46 Soviet research groups (out of 51) did not see any American lunar soil at all, although by the nature of the work they simply had to investigate it, especially since Academician Vinogradov told the readers in his introductory article: “Research of the Luna-16 regolith” , naturally, were compared with similar data for the Sea of ​​Tranquility and Ocean of Storms region, delivered by the Apollo 11 and Apollo 12 astronauts, in particular with the data obtained in the laboratories of the USSR ”[44]. According to legend, the "lunar soil" was obtained two years before the collection's articles were sent to print, but more than 90% of Soviet researchers admitted to this work, including those headed by Academician Vinogradov himself, did not see it in the eyes. Doesn't this suggest any thoughts? "Http://www.telenir.net/istorija/lunnaja_afera_ssha/p4.php All the rehearsals of the lunar soil, both ours and the American.
  54. Old old
    Old old 23 December 2015 00: 11
    +1
    From 1969 to 1972, about 382 kg of lunar matter were delivered to Earth by American astronauts.
    83% of this mass is kept intact for future research at the Johnson Space Center, and is not handled directly, but through special tools.


    "In articles published in the collection, several American researchers mention how much the Americans received Soviet lunar soil, and mention that these samples were obtained in exchange for American ones, say:" The lunar matter investigated in this paper is part of the material provided by NASA , which was received by exchange from the USSR in July 1971 (3 g) "(SE Haggerty) [43]. But no American mentions how much lunar material the USA transferred to the USSR in exchange for 3,2 g. it is quite strange that none of the 51 Soviet research groups, whose articles are included in the collection “Lunar Soil from the Sea of ​​Abundance.” A military secret?

    The secret is secret, but 46 Soviet research groups (out of 51) did not see any American lunar soil at all, although by the nature of the work they simply had to investigate it, especially since Academician Vinogradov told the readers in his introductory article: “Research of the Luna-16 regolith” , naturally, were compared with similar data for the Sea of ​​Tranquility and Ocean of Storms region, delivered by the Apollo 11 and Apollo 12 astronauts, in particular with the data obtained in the laboratories of the USSR ”[44]. According to legend, the "lunar soil" was obtained two years before the collection's articles were sent to print, but more than 90% of Soviet researchers admitted to this work, including those headed by Academician Vinogradov himself, did not see it in the eyes. Doesn't this suggest any thoughts? "Http://www.telenir.net/istorija/lunnaja_afera_ssha/p4.php All the rehearsals of the lunar soil, both ours and the American.
  55. Old old
    Old old 23 December 2015 00: 22
    +1
    Yes, and the means (OUR, Europe) of objective control (communication, radar) the same


    The forces and means of the Soviet RER, which were involved in the autopsy, and in obtaining significant information, telemetry channels of the Americans are described in sufficient detail by A. Popov. in Man on the Moon? What evidence? ” It also reveals the opposition that turned out to be our means of objective control.
  56. nvn_co
    nvn_co 21 December 2015 15: 33
    19
    Thank you and informative, and most importantly with pictures and calculations. smile fascinating, well done ... smile But here I have a few questions for you. What kind of skin that absorbs? (as far as I remember, the casing is an integral part of the aircraft body panel) Protects (or it would be more correct to say it would protect ...) a panel consisting of several layers of structural elements. And now one more question. And what do you think of what their lining consisted of and what layers were there, at least approximately? I understand that on the moon they also did not receive radiation? I certainly don’t mind, beautiful pictures are all good, but somehow with books on designing aircraft hulls this pleasure doesn’t really stick ... By radiation, you know how much the support unit weighs. At the expense of soil, if they have one, then again, only in the little pictures and in the pictures ... Ours right away, but investigate the soil for you, but they will not, we won’t give, they say, we won’t show but it is! there are a hundred pounds, there’s tama, it’s written on that site ... smile hi Я
  57. nvn_co
    nvn_co 21 December 2015 16: 02
    14
    I will clarify about the "block" and "I" - I failed to finish writing ... Support unit - I mean, the crew life support units. Yes, they had such a mass of tama pepelats ... They even had the hull altered on the Apollo, because as ours said, the guys here are not quite right with you and ours helped a little ... the consequences that significantly influenced the health of the astronauts, so to speak, the guys were suicide bombers ... There were no such protection and life support systems that could fall into the range of payload masses of their launch vehicles.
  58. Lukich
    Lukich 21 December 2015 16: 22
    +3
    Quote: nvn_co
    - I meant the crew life support blocks. Yes, they have a tama pepelats of such a mass should have been ...

    in 1978 at Baikonur I personally saw climbing the lunar block. ours, which was then destroyed. It was very similar to the American lunar module. Our scientists and designers also did not foresee everything?
  59. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 17: 08
    +1
    Quote: Lukich
    in 1978 at Baikonur I personally saw climbing the lunar block. ours, which was then destroyed.

    In Dmitrovo, you can still "climb" at the training ground. Not LB, but LK





    Comparison with the Americans:
  60. spravochnik
    spravochnik 21 December 2015 18: 15
    +5
    There is nothing surprising in comparison. Our module was designed for 1 person.
  61. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 18: 32
    -4
    Quote: spravochnik
    There is nothing surprising in comparison. Our module was designed for 1 person.

    Did I say the opposite?
    Now, if our for 1 astronaut, would be MORE American on 3 .... then all sorts of experts would be right, suspicion.
    And so: everything converges and is comparable.
  62. Wheel
    Wheel 22 December 2015 03: 29
    +3
    Quote: opus
    And so: everything converges and is comparable.

    What converges and what is comparable?
    The devil is in the details, if Che.
  63. Loreal
    Loreal 25 December 2015 16: 29
    0
    Our still was not engaged in braking to enter the lunar orbit
  64. Lukich
    Lukich 21 December 2015 20: 18
    +5
    Quote: opus
    Comparison with the Americans:

    I'm not talking about size, about appearance
  65. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 00: 44
    -3
    Quote: Lukich
    I'm not talking about size, about appearance

    And is it important?
    Rocket launchers they are also similar
  66. nvn_co
    nvn_co 21 December 2015 16: 42
    11
    For the great radiation calculators ... Here, by the way, another article about radiation during the flight to the moon ... "Almost the same, but quite a bit different" ... But with pictures and calculations ... 100 pounds
    http://ligaspace.my1.ru/news/2010-02-06-217 wink
  67. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 17: 12
    -3
    Quote: nvn_co
    For the great radiation counters ...

    .
    For "small" ones.
    Poor humanity:
    Do not fly him to Mars, Venus, and to distant stars.
    Radiation
    Quote: nvn_co
    100 pounds

    Well, no matter how you can not be without BeS StopudovSvinsa, nor how

    do you even THINK what kind of numbers are given there (I used the same scoreboards in the answer to you).

  68. nvn_co
    nvn_co 21 December 2015 17: 27
    +5
    No, why is the poor ... It will fly when it’s both on Mars and on the Moon ... It will figure out what is needed and how it is needed, and it will fly. 100 percent (smile) will fly!
    And into the account "do you even THINK what kind of numbers are given there (I used the same scoreboards, in the answer to you)", so I thanked you lower there for the answers and explanations, before you commented here ...
    About the "great and calculators", there was an incorrect joke, I beg your pardon ...
  69. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 17: 47
    +3
    Quote: nvn_co
    .. Come up with what you need and how

    Yes, you don’t have to think anything, everything was invented long ago.
    Not the threshold values ​​of ionizing radiation, as some write.
  70. stas777a
    stas777a 21 December 2015 16: 54
    10
    The question is VERY important, because if they weren’t on the moon then (trickery, bluffing ...), then it’s not at all a fact that they now have the weapons that were declared (again bluffing).
    I spent about a month in the spring of 2014, for days digging info. For me it became 100% obvious that there was no man on the moon. The main three mistakes:

    1. Mass and overall parameters. In one of the last expeditions, the landing module was on the moon for more than 3 (three) days. To adjust the planes of the trajectories of the module launched from the moon and the orbital station, you need a huge amount of fuel or a long time. Neither is impossible.
    2. Stars when shooting from automatic American stations are visible, but when shooting manually, they are not, not in a single photograph. Generally.
    3. The absolutely unnatural movement of the "astronauts" is different along the X and Y axes - this is impossible without an external suspension.
  71. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 18: 42
    -2
    Quote: stas777a
    To adjust the planes of the trajectories of the module launched from the moon and the orbital station, you need a huge amount of fuel or a long time.

    What?
    what difference did he have there 3 days or a day. what does it change?


    1. The first space for the moon = 1,7 km / s

    2. There is no atmosphere, NOU can be made at least 5 km above the surface (if only not to touch the mountains - Huygens peak = 4,7 km
    Quote: stas777a
    Neither is impossible.

    la la
    Well justify?
    Quote: stas777a
    and with manual shooting they are not, not in a single photograph. Generally.

    Lunar-Orbiter 1 August 23, 1966, view of the Earth from the Moon

    Are visible?

    Earth Rise, August 24, 1966.

    Are these "stars"?


    belay
    Quote: stas777a
    Absolutely unnatural movement of "astronauts" is different along the X and Y axes - this is impossible without an external suspension.

    Are you an orthopedic specialist in movements with gravity 1/6 of the earth, with the complete absence of the environment (resistance) and with a 200kg spacesuit?
    I will remind you 6 of our model space in a pool of water and a short peak. But there and there is a medium (air, water).
    Nobody has full-scale stands with vacuum and with g = 1,622 m / s²
  72. stroybat ZABVO
    stroybat ZABVO 21 December 2015 19: 57
    +8
    on the video @ from the moon @ the astronaut jumps in and hangs quite plausibly. and the dust ...... falls faster ....... hmm ..... should then fall at the same time
  73. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 20: 56
    +1
    Quote: stroybat ZABVO
    .hm ..... should then fall at the same time

    that's right
    Fluff and pellet in vacuum , under the influence of gravity fall at the same speed. The law of gravity.


    Only the trouble is:
    There is still an atmosphere on the moon (pressure on the surface is about 10 nPa). At night, the gas content above it does not exceed 2,0 · 105 particles / cm³


    Filming wasn’t at night?
    And as soon as the sun comes out the atmosphere of the moon increases by two orders of magnitude due to degassing of the soil.

    In the sun during the day there is up to +120 ° C.

    What do you think in the atmosphere of a speck of dust and an astronaut will fall at the same speed?


    m = mass of the falling body.
    g = gravity acceleration. On Earth, it is approximately equal to 9,8 m / s2.
    ρ = density of the fluid in which the body falls.
    A = projection area of ​​the body. This is the area of ​​the body area perpendicular to the direction of movement of the body.
    C = drag coefficient. It depends on the shape of the body. The more streamlined the shape, the lower the ratio.

    there will still be Archimedean force (but it is neglected)
    as well as direct kinetics (gas molecules from the lunar soil moving upward hit a speck of dust, giving it an impulse).
  74. stroybat ZABVO
    stroybat ZABVO 21 December 2015 22: 12
    +6
    pour water into a glass jar, if there is an aquarium, it’s better. throw two pebbles, one for more, please the other for less. clear light, that the small one will fall faster, ..... so, it means, what is the atmosphere density at the cinema @ from the moon @, so that @ astronaut @ would fall later than sand? and the actor is clearly suspended on a cable with a counterweight, I tell you as a theatrical person and runs along an inclined plane, faking a run on the @ moon @. he, the actor, bounces, like @ on the moon @, and the sand falls on gravity.
  75. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 20: 58
    +3
    Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  76. stroybat ZABVO
    stroybat ZABVO 22 December 2015 00: 54
    +7
    one of the astronauts boasted that he carried on a lunar probe, attention to the screen !, a feather of some kind of bird to check or is it true, the second time attention to the screen! that on the moon it will fall simultaneously with the hammer to the surface! Zadornov !!!!! in both cases!!!!!
    Yeah.....
    by the way, according to this @ smart @ astronaut, they fell at the same time.
    !!! there will still be Archimedean force !!!!!!!!
    you write.
    may strength come with you!
  77. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 01: 31
    -6
    Quote: stroybat ZABVO
    may strength come with you!

    with me brain
    \ See originals:







    and listen to smart people:


    I especially liked about the film "Lunokhod-1"



    and not crap (molded from the truth and fraud)


    -------------------------------------------------- ----
    and here is the math, about dust

  78. stroybat ZABVO
    stroybat ZABVO 22 December 2015 02: 07
    +3
    my brain is with me, you write, but do you have eyes, eyes?
    joke, do not be offended.
    I, behold, see that much has been filmed on earth, on planet Earth. and the article is about falsification of filming.
    and stop climbing to my computer, it's indecent.
  79. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 12: 44
    -4
    Quote: stroybat ZABVO
    I, behold, see that much has been filmed on earth, on planet Earth.

    You seem to have no brain, no eyes or ears (3-in-1 shampoo), repeat:

    listen to the uncle in uniform


    --
    then we watch the "full-scale" film "Lunokhod-1" walks on the moon:

    Quote: stroybat ZABVO
    and stop climbing to my computer, it's indecent.

    you also have a schizo probably ... although I'm not an expert
  80. stroybat ZABVO
    stroybat ZABVO 22 December 2015 17: 29
    +3
    ham is a chelovek who is rude. You are a boor.
  81. Old old
    Old old 23 December 2015 00: 33
    +3
    listen to the uncle in uniform

    "Uncle in epaulettes" voices what was ordered. That's why he is in uniform.
    And the knowledge about the suspicious deaths of "lunar astronauts", who killed "lunatics" and passed other astronauts, makes the "uncle" also be very sincere!
  82. Old old
    Old old 23 December 2015 00: 33
    +1
    listen to the uncle in uniform

    "Uncle in epaulettes" voices what was ordered. That's why he is in uniform.
    And the knowledge about the suspicious deaths of "lunar astronauts", who killed "lunatics" and passed other astronauts, makes the "uncle" also be very sincere!
  83. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 20: 48
    +5
    In the video from 45 minutes, exhausted astronauts show the circus number flying to the helicopter. They don’t even know that weightlessness makes it impossible to move.
  84. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 20: 42
    +3
    In the video, 42 min, what peppy astronauts are. They do not know that gravity does not allow them to move. This is a secret of the USSR, hidden just in case.
  85. yehat
    yehat 21 December 2015 23: 44
    +4
    correction, there is ...
    full-scale stand at the Central Research Institute of RTK for testing equipment Buran
    full imitation of zero-gravity movement in a tower about 70 meters high with the help of very accurate compensating counter-pulses.
    The Americans did not believe that such a thing could be done (their stand in Canada - stands on ice !!!) until they themselves saw in perestroika.

    with my own eyes I saw on an excursion.
  86. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 00: 49
    -5
    Quote: yehat
    correction, there is ...

    with g = 9,82m / s²?
    I did not deny it!
    Quote: opus
    Nobody has full-scale stands with vacuum and with g = 1,622 m / s²


    with g = 1,622 m / s² is there?

    And 70 meters for g = 9,82m / s² ...
    we have in the Central Research Institute of Robotics and Technical Cybernetics, on Tikhoretsky there is the same, but less
  87. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 00
    +4
    Thanks opus for the video. I advise everyone to watch, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people by cutting $ 20 billion.
  88. yehat
    yehat 23 December 2015 00: 06
    +2
    this is the same tower. height 79 meters, not counting the antenna and the base. Stand inside with a purely useful height of about 35-40m.
    And it's not that something falls there. Suspend and imitate the mechanics of movement in a vacuum.
  89. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 20: 25
    +3
    So opuus. I’m watching the video, but the puncture is already in the 16th minute. The lander in the sun glistens, and yet all charred.
  90. The comment was deleted.
  91. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 17: 02
    0
    Quote: nvn_co
    Yes, they had a tama pepelats of such a mass ... They even had their hull altered on the Apollo, because as ours said, the guys here are not quite right at




    Quote: nvn_co
    There were no such protection and life support systems then,


    The Apollo spacecraft crew life support system was developed and manufactured by Airsearch (USA). The system ensures that the temperature in the cockpit is within 21–27 ° С, humidity from 40 to 70%, and pressure 0,35 kg / cm². In preparation for the start and at the start, the atmosphere in the cockpit consists of 60% oxygen and 40% nitrogen, in flight this mixture is bleed and replaced with pure oxygen.

    The cryogenic unit supplies oxygen to the cabin through a regulator that maintains pressure from 0,35 to 0,38 kg / cm². The maximum allowable oxygen leak from the cab is 0,227 kg / h. The system can compensate for oxygen leakage up to 0,3 kg / min. which occurs during a breakdown in the wall of a cabin with an area of ​​3 cm². In this case, an increased oxygen supply causes the valve of the oxygen gas feed tank to open automatically. At maximum supply, the calculated pressure will remain in the cabin for 5 minutes, during which time the crew must have time to put on spacesuits or fill up the hole and eliminate the oxygen leak from the cabin.

    In the feed tank, oxygen is at a pressure of 70 kg / cm². A liquid oxygen feed system is not used, since additional time is required to convert liquid oxygen to gaseous and the system becomes inert. Oxygen from the feed system with a pressure of 1,4 kg / cm² is used to displace the water and glycol from the tanks to the system units.


    The ventilation system has 4 fans, 2 are installed in the cab and 2 are included in the spacesuit system.
    The flow rate provided by the cabin fans is 2,43 m³ / min, and the spacesuit fans are 0,945 m³ / min.

    Cassettes with lithium hydroxide and a 3 mm layer of activated charcoal have an area of ​​52 cm² and a thickness of 12,5 cm.

    Drops of water are captured by water-absorbing tapes. moving between the heat exchanger and the dehumidifier.

    The cooling system has 2 isolated and completely overlapping glycol circuits with evaporators. The selection and inclusion of circuits is done manually by astronauts. Glycol is cooled in heat exchangers and additional cooling takes place in the evaporator. Glycol is pumped by three pumps with a magnetic coupling, the impeller speed is 12 rpm, the outlet pressure of the pump is 000 kg / cm², the flow rate is 2,1 kg / h, and the power is 90 W.

    In the process of qualification tests, the life support system was tested, simulating a 14-day flight of a ship with a crew of three people.
  92. yehat
    yehat 21 December 2015 23: 52
    +4
    and again nonsense ...
    you say that the system protected during the breakdown of 3cm2
    but our crew died during the descent in a second from a valve that opened too early in the stratosphere with an area of ​​less than 1 cm2. The man did not have time to shut his finger - while he pulled his hand, he died.
  93. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 01: 05
    -2
    Quote: yehat
    and again nonsense ...

    you nonsense yourself
    Quote: yehat
    but our crew died during the descent in a second from a valve that opened too early in the stratosphere with an area of ​​less than 1 cm2

    compare the volumes (and air supply) of them and ours. pressure
    Quote: opus
    0,35 kg / cm².
    they

    in the Vostoks, Voskhody, Soyuz and Salutes cosmonauts breathe air, which in terms of gas composition differs very little from the earth:nitric oxygen with a total pressure of 760 ± 50 mm Hg (Americans have purely oxygen, respectively, an atmosphere with a pressure of about 260 mm Hg)

    Nitrogen (Akhtung is very important: divers, decompression))

    Flow rate, with equal diameter, is directly proportional to pressure (and it is 3 times less)
    Quote: yehat
    The man did not have time to shut his finger - while he pulled his hand, he died.

    On June 30, 1971, three cosmonauts of the Soyuz-11 crew:
    The position of the crew members indicated that they tried to repair the leakHowever, under extreme conditions, the fog that filled the cabin after depressurization, severe pain throughout the body due to acute decompression sickness and rapidly lost hearing due to bursting eardrums, the astronauts closed the wrong valve and lost time. When George Dobrovolsky (according to other sources, Viktor Patsaev) discovered the true cause of the depressurization, he no longer had time to eliminate it.

    The astronauts were conscious of everything only 15-20 secondsd after depressurization and just did not have time to do anything. They did not have spacesuits. 3 people in spacesuits didn’t fit in the cabin, but it was necessary 3, because the Americans were already flying together.

    Americans in spacesuits. AO Apolon system = identical to the SJO spacesuits.
    Quote: yehat
    The man did not have time to shut his finger - while he pulled his hand, he died.


    why shut it up?
    Alexey Eliseev, USSR pilot-cosmonaut: They had fog immediately in the cockpit. They got rid of the chairs and began to twist the valve, but not the one. If they began to twist that valve, they would be alive. Well, since they lost time on this valve, depressurization occurred, they lost consciousness, and then, the blood boiled, they died.

    Not to plug any "hole". It is easy to find it, they cannot move normally there.
    And there’s nothing to shut it up with.

    Vladimir Komarov:According to one version, the cause of the disaster was the technological negligence of a certain installer. To get to one of the units, a worker drilled a hole in a heat shield, and then hammered into it steel blank. When the descent vehicle enters the dense atmosphere disc melted
  94. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 01: 07
    +2
    “Fallen Astronaut” - Monument to the Fallen Astronauts personally installed David Scott near the Sea of ​​Rains, commander of Apollo 15, the ninth manned spacecraft of the Apollo program, which made the fourth landing on the moon.



    The Fallen Astronaut found its last refuge on the Earth’s natural satellite on August 1, 1971. Near the monument is a tablet with the names of 8 cosmonauts from America and 6 cosmonauts from the Soviet Union.


    Theodore Freeman (died, plane crash, October 31, 1964)
    Charles Bassett (died, plane crash, February 28, 1966)
    Elliot See (died, plane crash, February 28, 1966)
    Gus Grissom (died, fire on the Apollo 1 ship, January 27, 1967)
    Roger Chaffee (died, fire on the Apollo 1 ship, January 27, 1967)
    Edward White (died, fire on the Apollo 1 ship, January 27, 1967)
    Vladimir Komarov (died, accident during landing, Soyuz-1, April 24, 1967)
    Edward Givens (died, plane crash, June 6, 1967)
    Clifton Williams (died, plane crash, October 5, 1967)
    Yuri Gagarin (died, plane crash, March 27, 1968)
    Pavel Belyayev (passed away after a long illness, January 10, 1970)
    Georgi Dobrovolski (died, landing accident, Soyuz-11, June 30, 1971)
    Viktor Patsayev (died, accident during landing, Soyuz-11, June 30, 1971)
    Vladislav Volkov (died, accident during landing, Soyuz-11, June 30, 1971)


    Later, Scott very much regretted that the nameplate does not contain the names of Valentin Bondarenko and Grigory Nelyubov. But this is not surprising, given the position of strict secrecy of the Soviet space program, so David Scott did not know anything about their death.
  95. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 02
    +3
    There is nothing to argue about. Watch the video. Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  96. yehat
    yehat 23 December 2015 00: 09
    +4
    your version is just a duck
    I quoted a man - the manufacturer of this valve. He entered the commission after the incident. I think you can’t surpass the source.
    the cause of the accident - they forgot a piece of rag in the valve when assembling the device.
  97. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 16: 49
    +2
    Quote: nvn_co
    But here I have a few questions for you. What kind of skin that absorbs?

    Let's start with the alphabet:
    In "pieces of particles" cosmic radiation consists of 90% of protons (i.e., hydrogen ions), 7% of helium nuclei (alpha particles), ~ 1% heavier atoms and ~ 1% electrons. Well, stars (including the sun), galactic nuclei, the Milky Way - abundantly illuminate everything not only with visible light, but also with x-ray and gamma radiation.
    all except x-ray and gamma have a small (alpha generally the smallest of all) mean free paths in the substance and form relatively few secondary particles during nuclear interactions.
    Polyethylene, foil, aluminum and steel perfectly "quench", and there are many commonplace tricks against the "secondary".
    Nevertheless, the units are glad and even 100 eV is nothing.
    KA (Apollo) passed the Van Alen belt for a minute: 10000km / 12km / s = 833sec = 16 minutes (up to 30 minutes). IT IS POSSIBLE TO RUN THIS TIME NEAR the reactor core and nothing (practically) will happen.
    therefore
    Quote: Mahmut
    Even at school, a physics teacher told us that the most difficult thing in flying to the moon is to overcome the radiation belt that formed around the Earth due to the magnetic field. To do this, you need a lead shelter chamber.

    either the teacher is stupid, or the students did not study.

    if on the Earth-Moon trajectory the flight according to NASA legend passed above a geomagnetic latitude of 30 degrees, then, according to the universal altitude course of proton flux intensities, radiation doses can be reduced by an order of magnitude.

    conventional spacecraft protection a thousand times reduces the radiation effect of the electronic components of radiation belts.

    JUST COMPARE EVERYTHING WITH DOSES IN PINE BORN (LNPP)

    Или:


    about "radiation" on the moon:
  98. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 16: 54
    0
    Quote: nvn_co
    And what do you think of what their lining consisted of and what layers were there, at least approximately?

    Command module:The inner shell is made of aluminum honeycomb profiled panels with a thickness of 20-38 mm, welded structure - a pressurized crew cabin with a free volume of 6,1 m³; the outer shell is made of profiled honeycomb panels with a thickness of 15–63 mm, welded from sheet stainless steel with a thickness of 0,2–1 mm. The outer shell, which forms the thermal barrier that protects the crew’s pressurized cabin, consists of three parts: the front screen, the pressurized cabin screen, and the rear screen, which are fastened to the pressurized cabin by I-beam fiberglass power elements that insulate the pressurized cabin from thermal conductivity and temperature stresses. Additional thermal insulation is provided by a layer of fiberglass between the shells.

    Ablation heat-protective coating of the outer shell of the command compartment of a honeycomb structure made of phenolic nylon with an epoxy aggregate with quartz fibers and micro bubbles. Ablation coating of variable thickness from 8 to 44 mm is riveted to the outer shell with phenolic adhesive.

    Lunar ship: the same thing + aluminum alloys of grades 2219 — T8751, 2210 — T81, 2239 — T851 + thermal and micrometeor shield made of multilayer mylar, coated on the outside with one thin layer of aluminum.


    Quote: nvn_co
    At the expense of the soil, if they have one, then again only in the little bits and in the pictures ...

    The soil lies in research institutes throughout Europe, including ours.


    In such tightly sealed solid plexiglass containers, NASA officials solemnly handed over all 135 UN member countries
  99. nvn_co
    nvn_co 21 December 2015 17: 07
    +7
    Thank you very much for the answers and clarifications! hi
  100. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 05
    +3
    Yes, do not be fooled by these bells and whistles. Information sea. No opus must be read. But thanks for the opus video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  101. andj61
    andj61 21 December 2015 19: 22
    +3
    Thanks for the information - convincingly, accurately, competently! good hi
  102. avdkrd
    avdkrd 24 December 2015 01: 27
    +2
    Quote: opus
    In such tightly sealed solid plexiglass containers, NASA representatives solemnly handed over to all 135 UN member countries

    the containers were handed over, and what is the big question in them. I remember one very serious US Secretary of State who very convincingly shook a test tube in front of the same UN members, claiming that there were chemical weapons. Considering, besides the USSR, no one can verify the identity of the substance in the container, and in case of discrepancy there is a convenient excuse for another place of sampling. There is no trust in the American official version. Not with anything.
  103. guzik007
    guzik007 22 December 2015 09: 41
    +1
    What kind of skin that absorbs?
    -------------------------------------
    I read that the astronauts were located so that between them and the sun there were tanks with fresh water reserves.
  104. Loreal
    Loreal 21 December 2015 17: 00
    +3
    RS-25 c RD-170 can not be compared, they do not have such engines. The F-1 was very shaky and unreliable.
  105. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 20: 40
    -2
    Quote: Loreal
    RS-25 c RD-170 can not be compared, they do not have such engines.

    1. And who compares with the RD-170?
    there was a message from "VVP" that they had no rocket engine


    2. RD-170 is not produced, as well as LV "Energy"

    maybe RD-171?

    3.RS 68 standing on the Delta 4 launch vehicle cost NASA $ 60 / tonne of thrust ($ 000 million).

    A kerosene liquid propellant rocket engine with a higher thrust but lower specific impulse RD 180 (RN Atlas 5) nominally costs NASA half the price - at $ 30 / tf ($ 000 million).

    For comparison, the price of the taxiway 171, on the basis of which the taxiway 180/191 was created, is within $ 22 / tf ($ 000-13 million).
    This scatter is partly due to the fact that the last two engines were created for the US domestic market, in particular for the Atlas 5 launch vehicle (RD 180 as the main engine of the central unit, and RD 191 as the engine for side units). However, RD 191 remained unclaimed in the United States, even after the creation of a more budgetary RD 193 (version without UVT).

    The most “cheap” closed-cycle engine can be considered the NK 33-1 LRE. Given the restoration of production, the price of the modification of NK 33-1 for the new Soyuz 2-3 launch vehicle can be up to $ 25 / tf ($ 000 million). Officially, NK 4,5-33 will be used until the old NK 1 reserves are depleted and replaced by RD 33 engines.

    Merlin 1D with an approximate price of $ 15 / tf (~ $ 000 million)

    that’s the whole story

    Quote: Loreal
    The F-1 was very shaky and unreliable.

    what bullshit
    the instability of the combustion process and "shaking" are different concepts.
    Experiments with bombs and variations in nozzle heads solved the instability problem.

    combustion in the engine was so stable that it could independently extinguish artificially caused instability in a tenth of a second.
    unreliable?
    Quantity: 65! How many failures / failures do you know?

    Nova NASA-1; Nova A-1; Nova NASA-2; Jarvis-1; Nova B-1; Nova 59-4-2; Saturn MLV 5-23L-0; Saturn S-IB-2; Nova 59-4-1; Nova 60-8-1; Saturn S-ID; Saturn S-IB-4. Saturn V S-1C
    ?
  106. Loreal
    Loreal 22 December 2015 10: 51
    +2
    They decided nothing on the F-1 sufficiently, so these engines are no longer used, and bought Russian. But wasn’t it easier to make it as a Soviet four-chamber? wassat
    Why did you start comparing RS-25 with Soviet RDs?
  107. opus
    opus 22 December 2015 14: 47
    -1
    Quote: Loreal
    They decided nothing on F-1

    resolved long ago and irrevocably.
    therefore it (F-1 and will revive for heavy pH
    Do not use because:
    1. There is no such a heavy pH, with such a required PN. there are no such goals and objectives.
    Yes, and terribly expensive f-1
    2. In the break m / a Russian and F-1 used RS-25 on the shuttle.
    And he was not an expensive one-time f-1, but a cheaper reusable (10 starts)
    and their stock of them, pieces 15.
    Not used for manned again: no carrier, shuttle closed
    Quote: Loreal
    But wasn’t it easier to make it as a Soviet four-chamber?

    we wanted but couldn’t (technologically) make a powerful single-chamber.
    Quote: Loreal
    Why did you start comparing RS-25 with Soviet RDs?

    man claimed that they did not have their own rocket engines.
    He brought the first one.
    Yes, and the 25th is unique
    1.LOX + LH2 from the ground
    2.
    Thrust 100,0% (sea level / vacuum): 1670 kN / 2090 kN (170,3 tf / 213,1 tf)
    Thrust 104,5% (sea level / vacuum): 1750 kN / 2170 kN (178,5 tf / 221,3 tf)
    Thrust 109,0% (sea level / vacuum): 1860 kN / 2280 kN (189,7 tf / 232,5 tf)
    3.

    4.


    don't like the 25th, take the RS-68, same LOX + LH2

    RS-68V will have an ablative nozzle, thrust + 60% of 68A, etc.

    Assured Access to Space-AAS shorter
  108. Loreal
    Loreal 22 December 2015 17: 30
    +2
    Quote: opus
    resolved long ago and irrevocably.
    therefore it (F-1 and will revive for heavy pH

    refuse him
    therefore put to SLS TTU from the Shuttle

    Excuses designed for idiots. If there was a rocket, there would be a load.

    A reusable engine is always more expensive.

    The American single-chamber does not fly, the Soviet multi-chamber does not.

    LH2 from the ground is for LOXs

    Bring thrust RD in comparison, please

    They had Assured Access on Soviet engines, and because of the unreliability and increased shaking of the F-1, the Apollo program closed prematurely.
  109. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 06
    +6
    And here he is on earnings. The answer to any question, but watch the video that he provided. Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people by cutting $ 20 billion.
  110. Loreal
    Loreal 25 December 2015 12: 41
    0
    Maybe he’s just curious to teach the ungrateful?
  111. ammunition
    ammunition 21 December 2015 20: 57
    +5
    Quote: opus
    1. They have engines


    They have NO engines
    ----------
    All that you brought are powder primitives ... and not from a good life.
    They really ruined us in 90 when they destroyed our plants and technologies of liquid rockets.
    And our Poplars and Clubs - also not from a good life .. and that is why.
    ----------
    For some reason, it seems to me that Werner von Braun beautifully took revenge on the Americans when he launched the American technology for cooling combustion chambers and engine nozzles for vicious ways.
    Namely - on the principle of a car radiator. And this Deadlock.
    And we immediately went on the principle of evaporation of fuel and oxidizer from the walls and chamber and the back surface of the nozzles !!!!
    -----------
    Saturn 5 was. But!! Could fly only on kerosene, And! with a limited pressure of radiant energy in the combustion chambers.
    Consequently - Saturn 5 could put into near-Earth orbit no more than 15 - 20 tons of cargo. That is - even less than our Proton.
    ----------
    I am sure. We can say - I know that the entire American Lunar program is a linden and a swindle.
  112. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 21: 35
    0
    Quote: ammunition
    you brought - these are powder primitives .. and not from a good life.

    Cool ...
    "powder" with an open and closed cycle?
    Oh well.
    And so for reference: there have been no gunpowder in America since 1944. It’s mixed. According to the TRD, they are essentially leaders.
    Quote: ammunition
    And our Poplars and Clubs - also not from a good life .. and that is why.

    ?
    With all its advantages, the turbojet engine is still more handy for the army.
    And no amplification will save.
    Quote: ammunition
    Namely - on the principle of a car radiator. And this is Dead End.

    ?
    Are you talking about "pipes" or what?

    What's on the pipes, what's on the milled channels - one principle

    Pressure in the COP, then yes:


    Quote: ammunition
    Could fly only on kerosene

    And who said that F-1 LOX + H2? belay
    “F-1 Engine Familiarization Training Manual” (Rocketdyne R-3896-1, 1971), “Liquid rocket engine combustion stabilization devices” (NASA SP-8113, 1974), “Advanced regenerative cooling techniques for future space transportation systems”, ( AIAA / SAE, 1975)
    Why then subclause 3.1.1.5.4 of the recommendations of NASA SP-8087 ("Liquid rocket engine fluid-cooled combustion chambers", NASA SP-8087, 1972) kerosene coking threshold Tst.zh> 728K

    ?


  113. opus
    opus 21 December 2015 21: 40
    -2
    Quote: ammunition
    And we immediately went on the principle of evaporation of fuel and oxidizer from the walls and chamber and the back surface of the nozzles !!!!

    Haha ha

    RS-25: Low Pressure Fuel Turbopump, LPFTP The remainder of the hydrogen passes between the inner and outer walls of the generator gas manifold to cool it and sent to the main combustion chamber.

    Wall layer (boundary layer, Americans also use the term “curtain” - curtain) : gas layer in the combustion chamber, located in close proximity to the chamber wall, and consisting mainly of fuel vapor. To organize such a layer, only fuel nozzles are installed on the periphery of the mixing head. Due to the excess fuel and the lack of oxidizing agent, the chemical reaction of combustion in the near-wall layer occurs much less intensively than in the central zone of the chamber. As a result, the temperature of the near-wall layer is much lower than the temperature in the central zone of the chamber, and it isolates the chamber wall from direct contact with the hottest combustion products. Sometimes, in addition to this, nozzles are installed on the side walls of the chamber, leading part of the fuel into the chamber directly from the cooling jacket, also with the aim of creating a wall layer.
  114. Bayonet
    Bayonet 22 December 2015 10: 04
    -2
    Quote: ammunition
    Saturn 5 was. But!! Could fly only on kerosene, And! with a limited pressure of radiant energy in the combustion chambers.

    Is Skylab a myth too? Cardboard from Hollywood? "Saturn" took her out too!

    dimensions
    length: 24,6 m
    maximum diameter: 6,6 m
    Weight 77 t.
  115. ammunition
    ammunition 22 December 2015 11: 58
    +4
    Quote: Bayonet
    Is Skylab a myth too?


    Of course a myth. A ten-ton can, depicting a "station" type. A banal cover operation.
    ---------------
    And indeed, all American "astronautics" up to the Shuttles are continuous BLUFF.
    Here are the quality materials on this topic -
    http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st80.htm
    The brief point is
    Here are the American "astronauts" after 14 days of flight .. at once behave like they didn’t fly anywhere. :


    A similar behavior absolutely impossible.
    ------------
    The fact is that ours kept secret the brutal effect of weightlessness on the human body. Here NASA and pierced.
    --------
    In a word - read and see the material here.
  116. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 09
    +4
    Naturally a myth.
  117. DarkRiver
    DarkRiver 23 December 2015 09: 02
    +3
    How simple it is with you, well, you must. Americans buy our engines Patamusht cheaper, it's like we go to the market to buy vegetables, oh)) Why don't the Chinese buy engines? They're probably even cheaper, aren't they? Mdyaa, and since when the Americans in space programs are guided by cheapness? Especially against the background of the Shuttle program? Moreover, to the detriment of their own manufacturer, is it with their lobbying traditions? Moreover, they continue to purchase even after the inclusion of sanctions? You yourself guess that you are flogging nonsense, but something makes you do it, right?

    Regarding the lunar program, I am not a supporter, not an adversary of any version, but something strange is really up to a fig. You have already written about the strangely peppy state of the astronauts after the flight, you have not commented in any way. And the mega-strange deaths of the lunar program participants? And what about the ultra-strange statements of astronauts and wife Stanley Kubrick and many more people who think it makes no sense to invent stories? And the super-strange disappearance of lunar soil and films? How do you explain everything there? Just not lucky, huh?
  118. mark2
    mark2 21 December 2015 15: 53
    +2
    . If the Americans had such wonderful engines that could deliver to the moon and return a person back to, then why now they still use our carriers?

    Why don't they fly to the moon right now? when there are more advanced and more advanced technologies. All flights ended in the 67 year !!!!


    1. And what is there to do on the moon? There are no minerals or oil. The delivery of solid hydrogen, which supposedly is there, will become so expensive that it is better to extract oil here.

    2.Each industry, like the state, having reached its peak, rolls back to the original one. Russia (USSR), having launched an automatic moon rover not the moon, also did not begin to develop such technologies. Indeed, you must admit that an automatic lunar rover robot for the 70s is a strong breakthrough in technology. Now robots are just entering our lives and then timidly. they are too imperfect.

    3. Americans buy Russian engines for a reason, see paragraph 2.

    There is almost no earth’s magnetic field ... However, none of the astronauts died of cancer, no one lost their hair, everyone returned alive and well ...
    Where did they share the radiation? A few millimeters of aluminum casing for hard cosmic radiation is not an obstacle ...


    There is no atmosphere in near-Earth orbit, and modern spacecraft have not gone too far in development from the 70s. However, astronauts, going into the expanses of space with hard radiation from cancer, do not die.
    I don’t know about the monkey. Run-not run. Dead or not. why not? Our dogs also died, but we fly into space.

    Lunar expeditions brought hundreds of kilograms of lunar rock to the earth. BUT from this collection almost nothing has been preserved


    Yes, they brought it. but all these stones and soil were distributed in many world scientific laboratories. The United States, of course, left more to itself, but the bulk of the soil was distributed to science centers. and the USSR, too, by the way got its piece of soil, equal to 3.2 g. The USSR also gave the United States exactly the same amount when our automatic station brought 101 grams of moon sand to its homeland.

    in my opinion, why guess so doubt. maybe it's worth a look at the moon, so to speak with an armed gaze? The landing site of all Apollo and Lunokhod is known. The optical capabilities of modern telescopes are truly endless. Since they drop by 13 billion light-years, what’s there for 1 second of light for such monsters?
    But no one will deal with this nonsense. because the USA was there. And it is really verifiable. What is the point of the United States was so clumsy to lie? They did not think that no one would ever decide to check all the facts?)
  119. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 10
    +1
    Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  120. andj61
    andj61 21 December 2015 16: 42
    -1
    Quote: GDP
    Why don't they fly to the moon right now? when there are more advanced and more advanced technologies. All flights ended in the 67 year !!!!

    This is not so! The last time people were on the moon more than 40 years ago. It was the Apollo 17 mission, which set off from Earth in December 1972. The first flight to the moon was in 1968, the first man visited in 1969.
    And do not fly, because it is expensive. The lunar program itself was launched after the flight of Gagarin, which dealt a serious blow to the reputation of the United States. The United States responded by flying to the moon. And now they don’t have such technology, they don’t have those missiles, they don’t have equipment, even the element base has changed. Now everything needs to start from scratch.
    As for the flights - there was - was not - a lot of talk. Filming, which allegedly was made on the moon, causes a lot of questions. It is possible that some of them were shot in the pavilion.
    But only our specialists who worked at the MCC in those days had no doubt that the Americans had visited the moon. This was also evidenced by the data of objective control. And they listened to their negotiations - they were not encrypted then.
  121. shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 11
    +2
    Watch the video. Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  122. Loreal
    Loreal 21 December 2015 16: 55
    +2
    They were very dumb and are not used. About the rest they kind of answered.
  123. Theline
    Theline 21 December 2015 17: 04
    0
    1) They buy our engines because they themselves have refused the shuttle program. With the current exchange rate, a program to send astronauts to the moon will cost much more.
    2) I think nevertheless they are not fools and somehow decided to provide the suit with protection from ionizing radiation.
    3) I do not pretend to be a minus, I say what I know. Can you please post a link to a source with information that the entire lunar rock was stolen from them?
  124. velikoros-xnumx
    velikoros-xnumx 21 December 2015 21: 27
    +2
    How do you like these options:
    1. There were no astronauts on the moon, photos, soil, reflectors, etc. were made by the AMS
    2. The astronauts were on the moon, but for some reason (photos and vedeo materials were damaged, damaged, of poor quality, or something that could not be shown to the general world).
    Both options confirm and explain the directing and staging of the landing.

    PS Due to the natural craving for everything mysterious and conspiracy theories, the 2nd option is close to me.
  125. saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 21 December 2015 22: 07
    0
    Quote: GDP
    . If the Americans had such wonderful engines that could deliver to the moon and return a person back to, then why now they still use our carriers?

    Because they are good and cheap.
    Quote: GDP
    Why don't they fly to the moon right now?

    They are going to Mars, drones are launching there.
    Quote: GDP
    The volume of lunar rock stored by the American is less than in the repositories of the USSR!

    The capitalists sold everything at auctions.
  126. Asadullah
    Asadullah 21 December 2015 22: 33
    +5
    . If the Americans had such wonderful engines ....


    It's not even about the engines, the main incident is not technical, but what distinguishes the Anglo-Saxons and makes them teachers of the whole world - accounting. The great von Braun, and he is really great, like Korolev, spent on preparations for the lunar program and two Saturn-5 rockets, 90% of the funds spent. And only 10% went to 13 successful launches and the Skylab orbital station, including launches of the good and familiar Saturn-1B rocket. That is, the Americans, in addition to exploring the Moon, made a stunning discovery in the economy, when it turned out to be cheaper to fly to the Moon than to cross the Atlantic on the Titanic. But the practical Yankees refused this, and took up the more expensive and dangerous Shuttle program, ditching quite a few astronauts.

    The monkey that was launched immediately before the first manned flight to the moon died from radiation.


    She died not even near the moon, but in orbit about five thousand kilometers high.

    Lunar expeditions brought hundreds of kilograms of lunar rock to the earth.


    Lunar soil, the main material for the study of the moon, from that laboratory receive micrograms, still Soviet soil. Nobody has ever seen American, not a single laboratory in the world. US laboratories, for such requests do not answerreferring to instructions.

    My opinion is that there was a moon landing, but not with a man on board ...


    Of course it was - Lunakhod-1, Lunakhod-2.
  127. heretic
    heretic 21 December 2015 23: 10
    +4
    Add point 6 here - the wonderful "loss" of the original film with the landing of Armstrong on the moon exactly at the time when technologies appeared to determine whether it was a combined shooting in the pavilion or in fact the shooting was carried out on the moon.
  128. kalibr
    kalibr 22 December 2015 13: 51
    +1
    All other samples that the Americans gave to anyone, and these are representatives of 135 states, turned out to be a fake ...
    How is this known? Only without reference to the livjournels ...
  129. Lev Leshchenko
    Lev Leshchenko 22 December 2015 15: 18
    +3
    Quote: kalibr

    How is this known? Only without reference to the livjournels ...


    A fragment of lunar soil, stored in the Dutch Rijksmuseum museum, turned out to be a piece of petrified wood. The opening is reported by BBC News.

    http://lenta.ru/news/2009/08/28/fake/
  130. Starley from the south
    Starley from the south 23 December 2015 01: 32
    +1
    All this is logical, but our cosmonauts, who looked at all the footage of the Americans staying on the Moon, did not find anything unreliable there. But the question of staying on the moon still seems to me controversial. And another important point, which little attention is paid to: why are new astronauts sent to the next "expedition" to the moon? After all, it would be easier and safer to send those who have already "been" there, right?
  • Shurik70
    Shurik70 21 December 2015 23: 04
    +4
    I don’t remember which expedition was the one who put the corner reflectors on the surface.
    I don’t know whether the Americans were there or not, but there are corner reflectors there.
    If you direct the laser beam to the "landing point", then the reflected laser is visible through the telescope, reflecting the beam exactly back. This is only possible with highly accurate corner reflectors.

    Although, of course, they can be delivered by an automatic station. So their devices sat down for sure.
  • hoot
    hoot 21 December 2015 12: 27
    +4
    This is Luntik !!! Look at the ears)))
  • Zmei
    Zmei 22 December 2015 05: 48
    0
    But Luntik is not so harmless ...)))
  • andj61
    andj61 21 December 2015 16: 32
    +2
    Quote: Loreal
    If someone suffers less self-esteem, then the USSR could be there 5 years earlier.

    Quote: kenig1
    The way it is)

    So you want to say that the USSR could reach the moon in 1965? But nothing that he had no rocket capable of delivering a man there?
    Around this time, it was only decided to create a rocket to fly to the moon, and it was almost created, but already in the 70s.
    H1 (GUKOS index - 11A52) is a Soviet super-heavy carrier rocket. It was developed from the mid-1960s at OKB-1 under the leadership of Sergei Korolyov, and after his death, under the leadership of Vasily Mishin.
    It was originally intended to bring a heavy (75 t) orbital station into near-earth orbit with the prospect of ensuring the assembly of a heavy interplanetary ship for flights to Venus and Mars. With the adoption of a belated decision to include the USSR in the so-called. The “lunar race”, by organizing a man’s flight to the moon’s surface and returning him back, the H1 program was boosted and became the carrier for the L3 expeditionary spacecraft in the H1-L3 complex of the Soviet lunar landing manned program.
    All four test launches of N-1 were unsuccessful at the stage of operation of the first stage. In 1974, the Soviet lunar landing manned lunar program was actually closed until the target result was achieved, and somewhat later, in 1976, the work on N-1 was also officially closed.

    The next rocket capable of delivering a person to the moon and returning back is Energia, and now the super-heavy Angara is being developed. But the United States managed to create its own Saturn-5 rocket already in the 60s, which allowed them to fly to the moon.
    1. yehat
      yehat 22 December 2015 00: 05
      0
      ours were ready to fly to the moon 2 years after the statement of the Americans
      because all this is extremely expensive, after the statement there was little sense and the program was curtailed.
      One of the problems of high cost was that there were no reliable large engines, which made the rocket more complicated and less reliable.
      1. Loreal
        Loreal 25 December 2015 15: 17
        0
        In 1962-63, they were still ready to fly with several launches. There is no problem to bring the Soyuz spacecraft with one launch, the lunar module with the accelerator to the Moon by the second launch and dock it to the Soyuz, or even bring the lunar module and the accelerator separately.
        A large rocket is needed only to bring out a non-modular payload. The American spacecraft was also modular, so the point is in Saturn 5? Yes, no!
        Long before that, in the USSR, a turbo flying on which everything was tested in a manned landing.
        1. Loreal
          Loreal 25 December 2015 15: 52
          0
          If the American spacecraft Aollon was not modular (although even its lunar mole was modular) and landed on the Moon with all the fool like your beloved Falcon-9, then all the same Saturn-5 is not needed since it was possible to launch such a ship on Earth orbit separately from its upper stage to the moon and dock them in low Earth orbit
          The modular Apollo could still be docked in a lunar orbit by delivering there the lunar and command modules with two accelerators, two times smaller than even the 3rd stage of Saturn-5.
    2. Loreal
      Loreal 22 December 2015 19: 14
      +1
      Quote: andj61

      So you want to say that the USSR could reach the moon in 1965? But nothing that he had no rocket capable of delivering a man there?
      Around this time, it was only decided to create a rocket to fly to the moon, and it was almost created, but already in the 70s.

      Why wasn't there? About Proton-K with a "lunar-flyby program" someone from your already in the Wikipelia poured delirium
    3. Loreal
      Loreal 25 December 2015 11: 39
      0
      Any R-7 rocket is capable of delivering a man to the moon simply with the assembly of spacecraft in near-earth or near-moon orbit, they will need not one but two or more for this.
      If the American lunar ship did not have a modular design and sat on the moon entirely like Falcon-9 and then started from it back to earth then Saturn-5 would make sense as well, this is the same stupid PR and drank dough like the Space Shuttle.
  • Aleks.Antonov
    Aleks.Antonov 21 December 2015 17: 55
    +5
    Could not. And there are many reasons for this. The main reason is the death of S.P. Korolev. And then, Glushko's ambitions, L.I. Brezhnev. And the technical solutions adopted in the design of the N-1, and for me "Hercules", I knew this launch vehicle under this name from childhood, did not cause joy either. 30 engines working in parallel, it was not a good life. We simply couldn't create an engine similar to the F-1. And still, if Sergei Pavlovich had not died, then perhaps we would have been the first on the moon. Allegedly, if only ... History does not tolerate the subjunctive mood.
    1. opus
      opus 21 December 2015 22: 13
      -2
      Quote: Aleks.Antonov
      0 engines running in parallel, it was not from a good life.

      30 LRE is not a problem.
      The trouble is that in N-1 there were hanging tanks and a carrying case.
      Like the FAU-2.
      Bottom line: Tk was not enough, all right up, the separation of the steps is hot, on the dry residue.
    2. yehat
      yehat 22 December 2015 00: 08
      +1
      At that time, the USSR could not allocate enough money to create a normal training ground for manufacturing and testing ultra-large engines. Therefore, they used what is and there were no successful solutions.
  • nemets
    nemets 21 December 2015 19: 55
    +3
    pride suffers among Americans
  • Bratkov Oleg
    Bratkov Oleg 4 May 2018 11: 58
    0
    The United States did not fly into space at all until 1971, another 10 years after the flight of Gagarin. Soyuz-Apollo - the first flight of the Americans, on Russian engines, by the way. Then on the Shuttles they put engines developed in the USSR with afterburning of generator gas. But such powerful and economical as the USSR did, and later Russia, did not learn. just a super-race, deciding the fate of other, undeveloped peoples, can not lag behind in space. and there’s such a bummer, the Russians are already on the moon, and the United States is still staging flights into orbit, and it breaches that the Russians “stole everything”. But the fact that the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR turned out to be a traitor to the Soviet people is sad.
  • samuil60
    samuil60 21 December 2015 19: 48
    +4
    Really no one thought about one simple thing: if in the 60s, with that still developing rocketry, the Americans were on the Moon, then why did they abandon the lunar program? Are the aliens afraid? In any case, it is precisely this version that is now being intensely pushed by various media. NASA had money - at least one place to eat, the arrangement of a lunar military base would give the United States undeniable advantages in the arms race: launching missiles from the moon on targets on the territory of the USSR we would have nothing to repel! Not to mention the fact that missiles of very low power would be enough for lunar launches. But suddenly - all stop! And since then, not a single astronaut has set foot on the moon. Rave...
    1. yehat
      yehat 22 December 2015 00: 11
      +1
      I am not inclined to develop these arguments too much: Americans are very practical, even overly. As long as space fulfills the goals of propaganda, money will be given. And then for the development of science, on the contrary, they will be kept on a starvation diet.
      Lunar bases for 70 years - it's just utopia.
      In general, you are not digging there ...
      1. Bratkov Oleg
        Bratkov Oleg 4 May 2018 12: 05
        0
        In the "Union" then there was a descent module, and an instrument compartment, and in the instrument compartment a toilet. Even with a mixed carriage, a woman can retire to the instrument compartment and make a toilet ... But in Apollo there is no toilet, there is only one cabin - a descent module.
        At present, they are only trying, and not every launch can be done according to the 6-hour scheme, when the Union is already docked with the ISS 6 hours after the launch. And earlier it took two days, or maybe more, and the American astronauts, before docking with the Soyuz, sat in the same position for at least two days and blew their pants. That is, when the hatch was opened for the first handshake, the Soviet astronauts greeted the American guys in sucked diapers.
        Yes, a historic moment!
        But in fact, the first second, third ... tenth man in space - this is all on the Soviet list. Anglo-Saxons are liars. Yes, they are the highest race, which should be the first everywhere, because it is the highest, and even at the cost of lies and deception, so that the charm does not dissipate ...
  • atalef
    atalef 21 December 2015 11: 30
    28
    Quote: Loreal
    If Stanley Kubrick filmed something this walk on the moon still does not cancel.


    I do not address simple type questions.
    1.SSSR could not know if there were flights or not, for a simple reason. Space control in those years has not been canceled yet, and if the USSR were able to launch spacecraft such as the Moon and moon rovers, and interrogate them during the entire flight, etc. , then the flight of the Apollo could somehow be controlled the same way.
    I served in the VKS (Evpatoria) and the eight-cup antennas (which were created under the Soviet lunar program, were so sensitive that they determined the emission of energy of an equal lit match) at the distance of the Moon
    2. tens of thousands of people were involved in this program - and so no one blabbed?
    3.SSSR had enough scouts in these structures - no one sniffed?
    4. And finally, if Kubrick removed all this, then he shot himself (and his interview) in such a way that it raises even more questions than the moon landing.
    1. Why hemisphere and the second half of the face is not visible
    2. Why does the claimed person not look like Kubrick.
    Really nobody saw so simple things?
    if you are trying to expose the biggest 20V scam (as you say about it) - it would be logical to do your interview in such a way that no one in the world would have any questions - is it Kubrick?
    1. Scoun
      Scoun 21 December 2015 11: 42
      +9
      Quote: atalef
      2. Why does the claimed person not look like Kubrick.

      And about C Kubrick ..... can be identified by voice and for specialists there is not any difficulty in this. hi
      In 1971, Kubrick left the United States for Great Britain and did not appear in America anymore. All his subsequent films were shot only in England. Director for many years led a reclusive lifefearing killing.

      Nicole Kidman
      It was Kidman in a July 2002 interview with the American newspaper The National Enquirer that Kubrick was killed. The director called her 2 hours before the official time of “sudden death” and asked not to come to Hertfordshire, where, as he put it, "we all will be poisoned so quickly that we won’t even have time to sneeze." According to British journalists, employees of the US National Security Agency for the first time tried to kill Kubrick back in 1979.

      I would like to note that the moon is not always over the territory of the Russian Federation))
      1. Ezhaak
        Ezhaak 21 December 2015 12: 37
        +6
        Quote: Scoun
        Quote: atalef
        2. Why does the claimed person not look like Kubrick.

        And in this photo the person declared in the video does not look like a young Kubrick at all. Here is the proof. atalef does not know at all that it is enough to grow a beard and mustache to change the appearance.
      2. andj61
        andj61 21 December 2015 17: 11
        +1
        Quote: Scoun
        I would like to note that the moon is not always over the territory of the Russian Federation))

        In those days, there were tracking ships across the oceans, so control was around the clock.
    2. Lukich
      Lukich 21 December 2015 11: 45
      +9
      Quote: atalef
      I served in the VKS (Evpatoria) and the eight-cup antennas (which were created under the Soviet lunar program, were so sensitive that they determined the emission of energy of an equal lit match) at the distance of the Moon

      cosmonaut Leonov has long said that the signal was tracked from the moon
    3. opus
      opus 21 December 2015 14: 58
      +6
      Quote: atalef
      I served in the VKS (Evpatoria) and the eight-cup antennas (which were created under the Soviet lunar program, were so sensitive that they determined the emission of energy of an equal lit match) at the distance of the Moon

      Well, of course, of course (about a match for 300000 km),Pluto will not even notice it for 300 km

      RTK "Pluton" ADU-1000? 40th Separate command and measurement complex? Military unit 34436?

      Antenna has software guidance with an accuracy of 1 angle. min emitter power 10-40kW

      Successful planetary radar Venus. The location of Venus established that the astronomical unit (a.u.) is equal to 149 599 300 km. ATthe possibility of error did not exceed ± 2000 km
      Venus, I recall, has an Equatorial radius of 6051,5 km
      And you mean the match "treat"

      -----------------------------
      in general, according to the lunar program, I and I G-4149 ground-based multifunctional complex Saturn-MS worked (commissioned in 1967).
      The complex included three receiving antennas KTNA-200, a transmitting antenna AP-400,
      receivers with parametric signal amplifiers cooled by liquid helium ("masers"), "Horizon" transmitters, command radio line, precision frequency equipment with a hydrogen generator, spacecraft range and speed measurement system, television system.
      And the radio-technical complex "Quantum-D" (1975)

      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 21 December 2015 17: 18
        -1
        Quote: opus
        Well, of course, of course (about a match for 300000 km), Pluto will not even notice it for 300 km

        "At the same time, the receiving part of the antenna system installed in the CDKS is capable of capturing energy equivalent to burning a match, if the latter could have been ignited on the moon."
        http://www.rg.ru/2014/10/09/reg-kfo/cdks.html
        1. opus
          opus 21 December 2015 18: 24
          +4
          Quote: Bayonet
          if the latter could be ignited on the moon. "
          http://www.rg.ru/2014/10/09/reg-kfo/cdks.html

          WG is lying.
          atalef the same, or flies WG.
          atalef most likely:

          and it is unlikely that he "served" there, because there was no videoconferencing at that time, and besides, he didn’t "catch" specifics
          I will explain about nonsense, I will prove more truly
          1. The antenna of the ADU-1000 is working in the decimeter wavelength range (λ = 30 ... 40 cm).
          He has no IR receiver
          2. The flame of a match — the temperature of the flame of a match is 750-850 ° C (The head of a match is heated to 1500 ° C). The gaseous medium of the flame contains charged particles (ions, radicals).

          And even though IR radiation is electromagnetic radiation anyway ...

          However, the IR range (approximately from 0,8 to 100 μm)
          Compare 30-40 cm (0,3-0,4 m) and 100 * 10 ^ -6 m.
          There is a difference?

          3. ZG radar SPRN detect the reflection of the radar signal from the torches starting ICBMs.

          BUT!
          - a 70-ton ICBM "exhaust" torch and a match torch?
          range of 5000-8000 km (to America) and 300 km to the moon?
          And the most important thing:
          ZG radar SPRN "work" on long waves
          Long waves (also kilometer waves) - a range of radio waves with a frequency from 30 kHz (wavelength 10 km) to 300 kHz (wavelength 1 km).
          4. Yes, and in general, delirium about the radiolocation of the flame of a match at a distance of 300 km of the orbit of the moon contradicts the basic equation of radar


          5000 km and a torch (L: up to 40 m, D: up to 7 meters, T from 2000 ° C) from a launching ICBM weighing 70 tons and a match at 300 km?

          Not funny?
          1. DobryAAH
            DobryAAH 21 December 2015 19: 21
            +2
            Waves are short with reflection from the ionosphere. A bunch of common mode antennas. And here - huge parabolas of high gain, special low-noise amplifiers with liquid nitrogen cooling are used. In ZGRLS the reflected wave, several reflections and large losses, but here is a direct location.
            But this does not prove anything, any evidence can be given. The landing of the Americans is nonsense.
            1. opus
              opus 21 December 2015 19: 59
              0
              Quote: Good AAAH
              Waves are short with reflection from the ionosphere.

              Oh, what are you older?
              who is short? match flame?
              HF is 10m-100m.
              at a match, as already written
              Quote: opus
              However, the range of infrared radiation (from about 0,8 to 100 microns)

              Yes, and do not care:

              Quote: opus
              Antenna ADU-1000 operates in the decimeter wavelength range (λ = 30 ... 40 cm).

              take on what on
              Quote: Good AAAH
              . A bunch of common mode antennas.
              ?
              or
              Quote: Good AAAH
              huge parabolas of great gain,


              How to take 0,8-100mkm to a receiver designed for 30-40cm?
              Quote: Good AAAH
              any evidence may be given. The landing of the Americans is nonsense.

              any delusional evidence can be given - the landing was not nonsense.
              So, what is next?
          2. andj61
            andj61 21 December 2015 19: 29
            0
            Quote: opus
            and it is unlikely that he "served" there, because there was no videoconferencing at that time, and besides, he didn’t "catch" specifics

            Naturally, in the 80s there was no videoconferencing yet, they were called differently. But the Evpatoria center was served by the military. And about "whipping" - how much can a private of the Soviet Army "whip"? what And about the match - it's just a retelling of what they said then. Maybe embellished. I also heard this in the 80s. I then worked after the institute at NII-4 MO, in Bolshevo.
            1. opus
              opus 21 December 2015 19: 50
              +5
              Quote: andj61
              And about the "whip" - how much can a private of the Soviet Army "whip"

              Literally
              Quote: atalef
              I served in the VKS (Evpatoria) and the eight-cup antennas (which were created under the Soviet lunar program, were so sensitive that they determined the emission of energy of an equal lit match) at the distance of the Moon

              1.Not about ordinary
              2.Ni about the stories "they told us".
              writes as if he himself saw a "match".
              And so for reference
              For the Lunar program, not RTK "Pluto" ADU-1000,40, 34436th Separate command and measuring complex? Military unit XNUMX (eight-cup) is for Venus, Mars, etc.
              For moonlight



              Quote: opus
              in general, according to the lunar program, I and I G-4149 ground-based multifunctional complex Saturn-MS worked (commissioned in 1967).
              The complex included three receiving antennas KTNA-200, a transmitting antenna AP-400,
              receivers with parametric signal amplifiers cooled by liquid helium ("masers"), "Horizon" transmitters, command radio line, precision frequency equipment with a hydrogen generator, spacecraft range and speed measurement system, television system.
              And the radio-technical complex "Quantum-D" (1975)


              In the early 60s in the Soviet Union began preparations for a program of a manned flight to the moon:
              - Resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR No. 1184-435 of December 3.12.63, XNUMX on the creation of the Soyuz complex
              - Directive of the General Staff of the RV No. 329260 of 1966 and the order of the chief of military unit 11284 No. 0073 of 13.12.1966/XNUMX/XNUMX
            2. andj61
              andj61 21 December 2015 22: 28
              0
              Yes, indeed, if you do not know that atalef served then urgent, then such an impression may arise. But these are the words of the soldier who served there - and nothing more.
        2. Bayonet
          Bayonet 22 December 2015 11: 52
          +2
          Quote: opus
          WG is lying.
          atalef the same, or flies WG.

          Weighing determines
          how much does a match weigh (m = 100
          mg = 0,1 g), specific heat
          wood combustion is equal
          13 · 10
          6 J / kg. Determined by
          stopwatch that match
          burns out in 20 seconds. Q = qm;
          Q = 13 · 10
          6 J / kg · 0,1 · 10
          -3
          kg
          = 1300J; P = Q / t = 1300
          J / 20s = 65 watts.
          Therefore power
          burning match equals 63
          Watts, i.e. by power
          superior to 50 watt
          light bulb.
          A 63-watt radio source is what the receiving antenna of the Long-Range Space Communication Center can detect, rather than a real match! What is not clear here? smile By the way, Voyager 1 has a transmitter of only 23 watts and nothing, it was received from a distance of about 18 billion kilometers from the Earth (2014) - 17 hours there was a signal with data from the probe to our planet. hi
          1. opus
            opus 22 December 2015 13: 13
            -2
            Quote: Bayonet
            Therefore power
            burning match equals 63

            Lesson - physics competition in 8th grade on the topic: "Thermal phenomena"
            A person (body) emits about 100W of heat (energy), according to your logic
            Quote: Bayonet
            A 63-watt radio source is what the receiving antenna of the Long-Range Space Communication Center can detect, rather than a real match!

            An astronaut / astronaut will easily spot the Pluto ADU-1000 spacecraft in the orbit of the Moon (+ 40% to energy matches and + 5000% to EPO matches). YES?
            And at the NOU (200-300km), just spit.
            Right?
            After all, the IR spectrum of a person (1,5 microns in my opinion) is the same IR spectrum of the EM radiation of a match (about 50 microns)
            ?
            Right?
            Does it detect?
            NO!
            Because the statement thereof is nonsense.
            1. Besides
            Quote: Bayonet
            Radio source
            must match the wavelength (receive path of the antenna)
            repeat:

            Quote: opus
            Antenna ADU-1000 operates in the decimeter wavelength range (λ = 30 ... 40 cm).

            Quote: opus
            However, the range of infrared radiation (from about 0,8 to 100 microns)

            2. There is still an angular resolution of the receiving channel (antenna) of the radar
            ================================================== ==========
            The ADU-1000 antenna does not receive the 63 W "energy" of the match, and does not receive the 100 W "energy" from a person (astronaut).
            EVEN AT NOU 300km from the receiver
            Quote: Bayonet
            By the way, Voyager 1 has a transmitter of only 23 watts and nothing, received from a distance of about 18 billion kilometers from the Earth (2014) - 17

            nothing "by the way"

            Two antennas: omnidirectional and directed. Both antennas operate at a frequency of 2113 MHz for reception and 2295 MHz for transmission (S-band), and the directional antenna is also 8415 MHz transmission (X-band). The radiation power is 28 W in the S-band, 23 W in the X-band.

            Information from Voyager to Earth is transmitted rigidly fastened to the body 3,65 meter parabolic antenna, which should be oriented exactly to the home planet.

            To receive a signal on Earth is used NASA’s 34 meter long-range aerials, but in some cases the biggest 70 meter antennas.

            The principle of radio communication is that current fluctuations in the transmitter antenna create electromagnetic waves in the surrounding space, which, moving at the speed of light, reach the receiver antenna and excite an alternating electric current in it. This induced current is very weak, but if you tune the receiver exactly in resonance with the frequency of the radio wave, then even its weak impact can swing quite noticeable vibrations in the antenna. Then they are amplified, analyzed and the transmitted information is extracted.
          2. opus
            opus 22 December 2015 13: 14
            +1
            Radio waves of different ranges pass through the earth's atmosphere in different ways. For space communications, the optimal range is from 1,5 to 30 centimeters.

            Outside this window, the radio signal is noticeably attenuated in the atmosphere andwhether it can even reflect on her.

            And you with a match in the range of 0,8-100 μm ( 0,00008 cm-0,01 cm)
            ? passed the "energy" of 63 watts?

            NASA's long-range space communications antennas radiate into space to half a megawatt of energy(and you are 63 cotton wool)

            CA:
            A three-meter parabolic antenna allows you to pinch a beam of centimeter-wave radio waves within an angle of the order of one degree, which gives a gain in power of tens of thousands of times.

            But this necessitates precisely aim the antenna at Earth. If the orientation system fails, communication with the device will be interrupted. That is how the Soviet interplanetary station Phobos-1 died.

            And you with a "match" and an almost spherical spread of infrared radiation
          3. Bayonet
            Bayonet 22 December 2015 17: 26
            -1
            Quote: opus
            And you with a match in the range of 0,8-100 μm (0,00008 cm-0,01 cm)
            ? passed the "energy" of 63 watts?

            Yes, I’m not a match !!! Forget her at all, like a nightmare !!! winked
        3. Bayonet
          Bayonet 22 December 2015 17: 20
          0
          Quote: opus
          The principle of operation of radio communications ...

          Quote: opus
          but if you tune the receiver exactly in resonance with the frequency of the radio wave, then even its weak effect can swing quite noticeable vibrations in the antenna. Then they are amplified, analyzed and the transmitted information is extracted.

          Thank you for enlightening me, and for 40 years of work at the radio and television transmitting center, I have not been able to find out! smile hi

          And with a match, you were too smart, the conversation was about the power of the transmitter, and not about a real match hi
        4. shamil
          shamil 22 December 2015 21: 19
          +1
          I read and I can’t understand, the conclusion will be flying, they did not fly Thanks to the opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people by cutting $ 20 billion. Watch the video all easier-
  • Bayonet
    Bayonet 21 December 2015 17: 17
    -1
    Quote: atalef
    I served in the VKS (Evpatoria) and the eight-cup antennas (which were created under the Soviet lunar program, were so sensitive that they determined the emission of energy of an equal lit match) at the distance of the Moon

    Hi Sasha! Is she in the picture? smile
  • shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 13
    +1
    Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  • Lukich
    Lukich 21 December 2015 11: 42
    +2
    Quote: Loreal
    If Stanley Kubrick filmed something

    something too much he shot
    1. Loreal
      Loreal 21 December 2015 12: 11
      0
      But why not strain too much? Serious uncles looked at the chronicle, and you watch it.
  • Ezhaak
    Ezhaak 21 December 2015 11: 42
    +9
    Quote: Loreal
    this walk on the moon still does not cancel.

    But it does not confirm! However!
    I hope the Russian module will fly around the moon and confirm the truth of some and the lies of others.
    If fact requires verification, verification is necessary.
    1. Irbenwolf
      Irbenwolf 21 December 2015 12: 01
      14
      It won't prove anything. an automatic station without people is quite capable of starting. Where there should be traces of "presence".

      It is another matter why the USSR remained silent in the event of "staging". What did you share, what did you share? I think that a piece of Roswell could well have been paid for.
      1. nvn_co
        nvn_co 21 December 2015 13: 08
        +4
        Why didn't you say anything? A simple policy, they could agree on a thread and the union fell silent, but got something for it. In other matters, Kenedy, they say, almost offered to jointly study space with the USSR ...
        1. Lev Leshchenko
          Lev Leshchenko 22 December 2015 01: 57
          -1
          A simple policy, they could agree on a thread and the union fell silent, but for this I got something


          There is an opinion (on both sides) that the Union received well for its silence:

          Chemical plants were built in exchange for finished products of the same plants, that is, the USSR received modern enterprises without investing a penny from itself. With active American participation, KAMAZ was built. And much more. [4] [85] [86] Billions of dollars flowed into the USSR. Before them faded those 0,5 billion rubles that the USSR spent on H1 per year. So, its discharge "into the trash" paid off a hundredfold, if we take into account the near (for several years) economic interest.

          http://bolshoyforum.com/wiki/%D0%A0%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C_%D1%80%D1%83%D0%BA%D0%BE%D
          0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B4%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0_%D0%B2_%D0%BB%
          D1%83%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%B0%D1%84%D1%91%D1%80%D0%B5_NASA
          1. shamil
            shamil 22 December 2015 21: 22
            +2
            I have the same thoughts. In those years, the slogans were the construction of plants and factories, chemicalization, land reclamation. The CPSU exchanged its inability and lag in the economy for silence and economic bonuses.
      2. Corsair
        Corsair 21 December 2015 19: 04
        +1
        Quote: IrbenWolf
        It won't prove anything. an automatic station without people is quite capable of starting. Where there should be traces of "presence".

        what And the presence of traces can not create an unmanned module? flag, traces, even candy wrappers can be thrown candy.
      3. Lev Leshchenko
        Lev Leshchenko 21 December 2015 23: 51
        +1
        Perhaps it's all about the grain.

        On July 8, 1972, our government shocked the whole world by announcing the sale to the Soviet Union of about a quarter of our crop at a fixed price of $ 1,63 per bushel (1 bushel = 36,4 liters). According to information from the same sources, the Russians would get another 10-20% cheaper next crop. The market value of grain in the country was $ 1,5 per bushel, but immediately jumped to $ 2,44. Guess who paid the difference? Right, taxpayers! Our prices for bread and meat instantly jumped, reflecting such an unexpected deficit. This, in fact, was the beginning of the superinflation of the 1970s. ”

        Ralph Rene, "How NASA showed America the Moon"
      4. yehat
        yehat 22 December 2015 00: 22
        0
        to open a bluff, how much money did you have to spend?
        For this, not enough speculation and indirect evidence!
        the USSR did not have millet so much free resources, and the shock from what was happening also took place.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 21 December 2015 12: 48
      0
      Already confirmed by high-resolution photos - they are real /www.nasa.gov/image-feature/nov-19-1969-apollo-12-lunar-module-intrepid
      1. Sirocco
        Sirocco 21 December 2015 13: 55
        +7
        Quote: Vadim237
        Already confirmed by high-resolution photos - they are real

        Can you tell me how miraculously the film in the movie camera that hangs on the astronaut’s chest remained intact? with such a minus on the moon, it should collapse from frost at almost 270 degrees Celsius.
        Moreover, the movie camera hangs on the chest without a protective casing from low temperatures.
        What do knowledgeable people say about this?
        1. atalef
          atalef 21 December 2015 14: 22
          +1
          Quote: Sirocco
          Can you tell me how miraculously the film in the movie camera that hangs on the astronaut’s chest remained intact? with such a minus on the moon, it should collapse from frost at almost 270 degrees Celsius.


          there are no 270 frost on the moon
          Quote: Sirocco
          Moreover, the movie camera hangs on the chest without a protective casing from low temperatures. What do knowledgeable people say about this?

          If it were CHANGE 8M - she would have definitely shot without a casing.
          What do you know about the camera and does it need a cover?
          1. Sirocco
            Sirocco 21 December 2015 14: 48
            10
            Quote: atalef
            there are no 270 frost on the moon

            And what does that change?
            It is checked personally, -45 degrees a children's cube from polyethylene crumbles into dust. And I’m silent about 150 frost. When the camera heats up, the film will solder, again an ambush. If not special material, and not a digital camera.))))
            Quote: atalef
            If it were CHANGE 8M - she would have definitely shot without a casing.
            What do you know about the camera and does it need a cover?

            Of course, I’m not such a specialist as you, I, as a specialist in near-shackling sciences, I want to convey that even with a casing, even without, even a Change, even an Amateur, in conditions of freezing temperatures, can take a picture, but this is before the first mechanical impact, then there are rewinds, in the case of the camera there is a film if my memory serves me, it moves from one babin to another. It seems so, if not correct, my illiteracy))))))
            Quote: atalef
            What do you know about the camera and does it need a cover?

            Question to question in continuation of the topic.
            What do you know about astronauts and astronautics? and does an astronaut need a spacesuit in outer space? lol laughing
            You probably don't need it, as I understand it.
            1. opus
              opus 21 December 2015 19: 08
              +3
              Quote: Sirocco
              And I’m silent about 150 frost.

              150gC "there is no frost there (if not night and not the other side). It's hot there (after sunrise, T reaches +120 ° C).
              The temperature of the rocks at a depth of 1 m is constant and equal to −35 ° C.
              There is no atmosphere on the moon. therefore, the power of the solar flux is many times greater than on Earth


              150grs of frost in a vacuum must still be ACHIEVED

              Thermal conductivity in vacuum is close to zero, so the heat flux from a heated body released into open space, will be carried out only due to radiation. The amount of radiation is proportional to the 4th degree of temperature.
              For example, if an astronaut suddenly finds himself in outer space (and far from the nearest stars, so that we neglect heating from external sources), having lost the ability to return to the ship, then he will not be covered with a crust of ice and he will not suffer an quick ice death. Its temperature, ~ 310 K, is sufficient to stay in comfortable temperature conditions for some time (at least until the arrival of the rescue space service). If we assume that there is no energy release in the cosmonaut’s body and that skin water evaporation excluded (the astronaut is in an airtight suit without thermal insulation), then it will cool by one degree in about forty minutes, even if the surface of his spacesuit is completely black, radiating energy most efficiently. With decreasing temperature, according to the law of Stefan - Boltzmann, cooling rate will fall.

              In fact, it’s not the cold that threatens the astronaut in a vacuum, and overheatingsince the heat dissipation capacity of the human body is about 100 watts; Effective heat dissipation is one of the important problems solved by space suit designers.
            2. Ezhaak
              Ezhaak 21 December 2015 20: 57
              +2
              Quote: Sirocco
              even an amateur, in conditions of freezing temperatures,

              Bravo. You correctly mentioned one of a series of wide-film devices. But it seems that you did not communicate with his film. And she did not require special cassettes, like the FEDs, Shifts, Zenit. The film was rewound together with paper, light-tight tape to another reel. And this tape was removed before refueling the film in the developing photo tank drinks
            3. Sirocco
              Sirocco 22 December 2015 05: 14
              0
              Quote: Hedgehog
              Bravo. You correctly mentioned one of a series of wide-film devices. But it seems that you did not communicate with his film.

              And what does it change, is there a cassette or not, I’m just not talking about the cassette, but about rewinding the film, the reel is still there.
              But this camera could not be used, although I wanted to purchase it in the past. drinks Have a nice one you too.
        2. Terminatorjjck
          Terminatorjjck 21 December 2015 15: 21
          +5
          Maybe the film is somehow frost-free, who knows, but radiation should have spoiled the image thoroughly.
      2. opus
        opus 21 December 2015 19: 02
        +2
        Quote: Sirocco
        did the film in the movie camera that hangs on the astronaut’s chest remain intact? with such a minus on the moon,



        Nobody has canceled thermal insulation yet.
        The space there is airless - there is no convection, heat transfer is difficult, so the temperature changes very slowly.
        Better than any thermos.

        And on the Moon (as in orbit) the problem is not in the cold, but in the heat (heat sink) about
        Filming was carried out not at noon, but in the morning.

        And for some reason, it does not surprise anyone that it has not melted (it has not crunched
        Quote: Sirocco
        with such a minus on the moon
        ) film on the Luna-3 space station, who was the first to photograph the back and was in the same conditions?

        and Luna 9?

        ?
        and at the "Lunokhod"

        ?

        The electric Hasselblad 500EL from Fotografiska AB., Has been adapted by NASA for space travel since 1962.

        He does not need a casing (he is like a casing)

        1. Lev Leshchenko
          Lev Leshchenko 22 December 2015 00: 29
          -1
          The space there is airless - there is no convection, heat transfer is difficult, so the temperature changes very slowly.

          What does "no convention" have to do with it?
          "Does the temperature change very slowly" in direct sunlight?
          1. opus
            opus 22 December 2015 13: 45
            -2
            Quote: Lev Leshchenko
            What does "no convention" have to do with it?

            What should I broadcast about "prostitution" or "divergence"?
            Convection is the main share in heat transfer if the body (or medium) has not reached T, when the radiation (glow) prevails over K.
            (I hope the camera or the OP on the Moon haven’t reached T above 400 ° C?)
            Quote: Lev Leshchenko
            "Does the temperature change very slowly" in direct sunlight?

            1. The temperature changes at Lev Leshchenko when he was frightened or sick
            2.I will remind you (suddenly they read it sucks) Homo Sapiens claims that the film will "freeze"
            Quote: Sirocco

            film in a movie camera that hangs on the astronaut’s chest remained intact? with such a minus on the moon,

            (which rays are straight?)
            3.You have seen a photographer who shoots his face with his face (and camera, camera) right on
            Quote: Lev Leshchenko
            direct rays of the sun
            ?
            What will he "remove".
            ALWAYS are filmed: a light source, the sun behind the PHOTO, shines on the subject frontly.

            4.Even if you go out with the camera under the direct rays of the sun, in an airless space ...
            For how long does it heat up to 120 ° C? Three?
            5.Even if step 4 is made, the camera body heats up, since it is not sealed, there is the same vacuum (thermos). How long does it take for T in 120gC to "reach" the film?
            Per day?
            probably. but the moonlit night will come, and the photographer will not last so much
          2. Lev Leshchenko
            Lev Leshchenko 22 December 2015 14: 33
            -1
            You saw a photographer who takes off his face


            Really, I didn’t want to upset you. It's not about the face of the photographer.

            The guys left their gravitsapu under the sun and walked around for several hours. Then they climbed into it and, in an incomprehensible way, overcoming the attraction of the moon, left home. This is such a story and it is hardly believed in it.
          3. shamil
            shamil 22 December 2015 21: 30
            +3
            And they did everything dressed in diapers! Ay, how uncomfortable for the Americans. Therefore, they declared the protected area of ​​their landings!
  • Ezhaak
    Ezhaak 21 December 2015 20: 50
    +3
    Quote: Sirocco
    the movie camera hangs on the chest without a protective casing against low temperatures.

    a purely mechanical chamber as a whole does not have much fear of frost. The problem can only be with water vapor when leaving a heated room in the cold. But this problem is being solved. The cameras were previously kept in the cold and took it without going into the room with it ..
    The problem with the film is also solved. Application of a resistant protective layer
  • yehat
    yehat 22 December 2015 00: 25
    0
    without atmosphere, heat transfer is low
    it is not the casing that isolates the camera, but the lack of atmosphere
    I have another question - the camera should have suffered a little from the presence of water, because the atmosphere in the ship was with water vapor.
    1. Lev Leshchenko
      Lev Leshchenko 22 December 2015 00: 38
      +1
      They would be baked without atmosphere (like their gravitsapu) under direct sunlight.
  • yuriy55
    yuriy55 21 December 2015 14: 29
    +6
    Quote: Vadim237
    Already confirmed by high-resolution photos - they are real /www.nasa.gov/image-feature/nov-19-1969-apollo-12-lunar-module-intrepid


    You can refer to the high-resolution photographs for as long as you like, but this "bookcase" in the photograph, even without astronauts, is unlikely to be able to take off from the Moon.

    It was possible to provide many options for evidence that the Americans were on the moon, and undeniable, without doubt. But we got the jumping people and the flag ... laughing
    1. Lukich
      Lukich 21 December 2015 16: 40
      +2
      Quote: yuriy55
      But we got the jumping people and the flag ...

      got with this flag already am how much can you repeat, he was SPRING! E !!!
      1. yehat
        yehat 22 December 2015 00: 30
        +3
        how then could they stick it if it is spring loaded laughing
      2. shamil
        shamil 22 December 2015 21: 32
        +2
        And in the video, astronauts with self-winding ones. Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  • shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 23
    0
    Um, uh, they're real!
  • Simon
    Simon 21 December 2015 12: 21
    +5
    This will be known later when future cosmonauts find or don’t find the Apollo launch vehicle, which remained on the Moon, as the American astronauts said.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 21 December 2015 16: 36
      -1
      Quote: Simon
      when future cosmonauts will or will not find the launching pad of Apollo

      The landing module "Eagle" consisted of two stages - landing and takeoff. The landing station remained on the moon, serving as a launch pad for the takeoff. And Apollo orbited the Moon. hi
  • Alexander Romanov
    Alexander Romanov 21 December 2015 13: 10
    16
    Quote: Loreal
    If Stanley Kubrick filmed something this walk on the moon still does not cancel.

    Once again fly weakly to the moon? well, or at least fly to the ISS ourselves without our help.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 21 December 2015 16: 51
      -3
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      Once again fly weakly to the moon? well, or at least fly to the ISS ourselves without our help.

      Fly off. And they flew to the ISS on the Shuttles until they were decommissioned, seven people at once.
      Actually, in the construction of the ISS, how many modules and equipment were delivered by the Shuttles, for some reason they don’t remember about it here, or rather, they are modestly silent smile
      (cry)
      1. Loreal
        Loreal 22 December 2015 19: 23
        0
        These modules have a weight of two to three times less than those displayed by Protons
  • dauria
    dauria 21 December 2015 19: 52
    +1
    If Stanley Kubrick filmed something this walk on the moon still does not cancel.



    The most sensible comment is gaining disadvantages on a seemingly "technical" site? laughing What we've come to. Is the Earth even round? Or maybe America does not exist. Eh you, "patriots"
    1. shamil
      shamil 22 December 2015 21: 33
      +1
      That's because we are an educated country and draw the right conclusions. Thanks to the opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
      1. Loreal
        Loreal 24 December 2015 12: 43
        0
        Its lower part was burned, lying down after a month of being in zero gravity, lying after diapers, and here the prezik climbs kissing - yes, ashamed.
  • dzeredzavkomimu
    dzeredzavkomimu 21 December 2015 23: 38
    +2
    Simply, the landing modules of the descent vehicles should remain on the moon, the cuff satellites on the ground take pictures, where at least one photo is now taken, where the landing modules are, their meteorites have been bombed? where are the engines from .. Saturn .. why is it flying on ours now? cheaper? hardly.
  • stroybat ZABVO
    stroybat ZABVO 22 December 2015 01: 45
    +3
    cancels the movie that has been played in recent years, about the moon-taurus. and the little rascals from the usa need to be reminded that a little lie gives rise to great suspicion
  • mr.vasilievich
    mr.vasilievich 22 December 2015 08: 08
    +1
    Even if it wasn’t, then it WAS?
  • shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 18: 47
    +2
    He filmed something, someone told something - everything is a fairy tale. The USSR knew how to keep secrets, even having entered into a conspiracy in the matter of flying to the moon. Firstly, knowing about the 100% death from radiation, the Soviet cosmonauts were not sent on a flight, and secondly, the States were not aware of the effects of weightlessness. Photographs have been preserved of how tired astronauts pace along the deck of a ship, as they peer out gaily from the window of their quarantine house. And they didn’t know that after 5 days of weightlessness, a person cannot stand because of gravity. And this secret was hidden from the Americans even after the Soyuz-Apollo flight.
  • Bratkov Oleg
    Bratkov Oleg 21 December 2017 10: 00
    0
    Cancels, does not cancel, no difference.
    The United States generally did not fly into space another 10 years after Gagarin’s flight, so by no means, from a word in general, could not find itself on the moon. Here you just need to find pictures of the ships of Jameni on the Internet, and just think about their design, compare it with the Vostok ship ... For example, how an astronaut sits in the East, the Union ... and how American actors sit in mock-ups of spaceships "Dzhemeni ", and can a person withstand continuous 5 for 5 minutes, being in the American layout, for example? Why are all spaceships being launched into space, protected by fairings, and Gemeni type flew without fairings? There are hundreds of points, and each must poke and poke the nose of believers in the non-existent power of the United States.
  • _Vladislav_
    _Vladislav_ 21 December 2015 10: 57
    16 th
    A Soviet satellite in orbit of the moon photographed the landing of Neil Armstrong on the lunar surface, as well as the flag, the ship itself. So you can safely stop speculating around this.

    Quote: 79807420129
    On the one hand, vague doubts torment me, the Americans visited the moon, and on the other hand they buy rocket engines from us, and in the 2016 budget there is money for the purchase of our RD-180


    Why aren’t we going to fly the moon? Engines are, there is an opportunity. At the same time, they would have put the Russian flag.
    1. Dewa1s
      Dewa1s 21 December 2015 11: 02
      37
      Yeah, as soon as we see a photo as a proof of these words, we will immediately stop speculating
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 21 December 2015 11: 28
        10 th
        Quote: Dewa1s
        Yeah, as soon as we see a photo as a proof of these words, we will immediately stop speculating

        Well, crawl on the Internet, or laziness? There are photos from satellites!
        1. HUMANOID
          HUMANOID 21 December 2015 11: 41
          +6
          LINK THROW
          1. Bayonet
            Bayonet 21 December 2015 12: 33
            -3
            Quote: HUMANOID
            LINK THROW

            http://zzvezda.su/index.php?id=208&Itemid=&option=com_content&task=view
            http://galspace.spb.ru/nature.file/08099.html
            Look, there is a lot of material hi
            1. Bayonet
              Bayonet 21 December 2015 13: 13
              +1
              Quote: Bayonet
              Look, there is a lot of material

              Well, when there is nothing to argue, you can stupidly put a minus. That is your essence. yes
            2. unsinkable
              unsinkable 21 December 2015 16: 12
              -2
              Quote: Bayonet
              a lot of material

              Thank you buddy! good
          2. region58
            region58 21 December 2015 13: 43
            +2
            Quote: HUMANOID
            LINK THROW

            http://galspace.spb.ru/nature.file/08099.html
            But again, you say that nothing is visible there ...
            In the center are traces, the module is to the right.
            1. valent45
              valent45 21 December 2015 13: 57
              +6
              where are the footprints? point blank I do not see!
              1. RUS96
                RUS96 21 December 2015 14: 34
                +3
                ..........
              2. Bayonet
                Bayonet 21 December 2015 16: 54
                -8
                Quote: valent45
                where are the footprints? point blank I do not see!

                Can't see or don't want to see? smile
            2. Mig-31
              Mig-31 21 December 2015 16: 45
              +2
              Nikuya is not visible!
              1. shamil
                shamil 22 December 2015 21: 39
                0
                Not visible, definitely not visible. But thanks for the video opus. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
            3. Mig-31
              Mig-31 21 December 2015 17: 37
              +9
              Nikuya is not visible!
              Quote: Reduktor
              I mean, Mr. Leonov saw them on the moon ?!
              So he saw them in Soyuz-19 too!

              Yes, Mr. Leonov personally met the Yankees on the moon with tea, photographed them and led them to the earth with a wave of a pen, so that the Yankees were 100500% on the moon.
        2. Temples
          Temples 21 December 2015 11: 44
          18
          Soviet satellite in orbit of the moon photographed the landing of Neil Armstrong

          wassat wassat wassat

          And the Soviet lunar rover was specially created to meet the Americans and lay the carpet for Amstrong! wassat
          1. _Vladislav_
            _Vladislav_ 21 December 2015 11: 53
            +7
            Quote: Temples

            And the Soviet lunar rover was specially created to meet the Americans and lay the carpet for Amstrong!

            Quote: Temples
            LINK THROW

            Quote: Gunter
            Where can I see the photographs "made by the Soviet satellite"?

            Quote: Nyrobsky
            There is no wind on the moon.
            Question - What fluttered the American flag in the photo?

            Here are the people, the info for you and the point of view of the Soviet cosmonaut Alexei Leonov, who personally prepared to participate in the Soviet moon exploration program, and who denied many years of rumors that the American astronauts were not on the moon, and the footage broadcast on television around the world was allegedly mounted in Hollywood.

            http://ria.ru/science/20090720/177908258.html#ixzz3uwYv8PMf

            And I, dear comrades, would advise you not to accept different populist points of view. Yes, we do not like Americans, they are outright scoundrels in some places. But do not fall to the level of Yatsenyuk and Parashenko: who believe that "The Second Ukrainian Army first fought against the Soviets, and then liberated Auschwitz and reached Berlin"
            1. kit_bellew
              kit_bellew 21 December 2015 12: 10
              +1
              Very interesting material, thanks for the link.
            2. Scoun
              Scoun 21 December 2015 12: 48
              12
              Quote: _Vladislav_
              http://ria.ru/science/20090720/177908258.html#ixzz3uwYv8PMf

              The Americans put a television antenna on the lunar surface, and everything they did there was transmitted through a television camera to the Earth, several repetitions of these airs were also made.

              РИА Новости http://ria.ru/science/20090720/177908258.html#ixzz3uwl3J2Nf

              Despite the great respect for Leonov, I dare to note that delivering an "antenna" to the Moon, which at the appointed hour should be cut in and start broadcasting the necessary material, is much easier than delivering a person, and if a scam took place, then the scale of the scam means that people would not have doubts (the longer the better) otherwise it makes no sense to take it. Now, even if it is 100% true, no one will blush, this event already reached its goal, raised the spirit of American citizens, raised the United States and so on ... and now many of those people are gone and the country is still in the rays those events. In general, if it was a scam, then it was brilliantly executed and it was definitely worth it (for the USA).
              PS
              A simple example of a flag.
              Once pointed to fluttering the flag - the answer can always be adjusted. and nothing that the flag was sent with such difficulties, nets into the tube))) ours took and just installed titanium ))) The option of fitting the answer is valid for everyone.
              1. Bayonet
                Bayonet 21 December 2015 13: 33
                -7
                Quote: Scoun
                Despite the great respect for Leonov, I dare to note that to deliver to the moon an "antenna" which should be cut in at the appointed hour and start broadcasting the necessary material,

                If you had thought in radio engineering, it would have been wonderful in general! smile
              2. Scoun
                Scoun 21 December 2015 14: 14
                +5
                Quote: Bayonet
                Quote: Scoun
                Despite the great respect for Leonov, I dare to note that to deliver to the moon an "antenna" which should be cut in at the appointed hour and start broadcasting the necessary material,

                If you had thought in radio engineering, it would have been wonderful in general! smile

                I will not speak and tell you exactly where you need to think, but I answered the person who gave the link,
                According to him, a limited group of Soviet space specialists watched these launches through a closed channel.
                “We had military unit 32103 on Komsomolsky Prospekt, which provided space broadcasting, since there was no MCC in Korolev at that time. We saw, unlike all other people in the USSR, the landing of Armstrong and Aldrin on the moon, broadcast by the USA to the whole world. The Americans put a television antenna on the surface of the moon, and everything they did there was transmitted through a television camera to Earth, several reruns of these broadcasts were also made. When Armstrong rose to the surface of the moon, and everyone in the United States clapped, we here in the USSR, Soviet cosmonauts, also crossed our fingers for good luck, and sincerely wished the guys success, "the Soviet cosmonaut recalls.


                РИА Новости http://ria.ru/science/20090720/177908258.html#ixzz3ux7fJ6IF

                And I specially quoted such experts for you as experts.
                Quote: Scoun
                I dare say what to deliver to the moon "antenna"

                And I followed the link from Vladislav
                Quote: _Vladislav_
                Here are the people, the info for you and the point of view of the Soviet cosmonaut Alexei Leonov, who personally prepared to participate in the Soviet moon exploration program, and who denied many years of rumors that the American astronauts were not on the moon, and the footage broadcast on television around the world was allegedly mounted in Hollywood.

                http://ria.ru/science/20090720/177908258.html#ixzz3uwYv8PMf

                I’ll give up everything and I’ll definitely begin to understand the antennas and not what I read.
              3. shamil
                shamil 22 December 2015 21: 43
                +2
                Believe your eyes. Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
        3. Loreal
          Loreal 21 December 2015 12: 51
          -1
          The comrade as the party is twisting by reference ... the moon, having chastised the moon for the public to fail with N-1, was simply given to the Americans. The spacecraft could be assembled in low Earth orbit as the ISS was now assembled.
          1. Lukich
            Lukich 21 December 2015 13: 20
            +4
            Quote: Loreal
            The spacecraft could be assembled in low Earth orbit as the ISS was now assembled.

            then there was simply no such technology. remember in what year it was the same ISC appeared much later, and more than one country built it
          2. Loreal
            Loreal 21 December 2015 16: 22
            +3
            Another crooked and sold out to the Americans, what technology, docking in orbit?
            Nnnnh? The ISS is mainly MIR-2, an American service module for Russian launch and production.
            https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Заря_(модуль_МКС)
            And here we drove! laughing By the way, throughout the station - they are the main ones.
      2. Stas157
        Stas157 21 December 2015 12: 58
        +6
        Quote: _Vladislav_
        Here are the people, the info for you and the point of view of the Soviet cosmonaut Alexei Leonov, who personally prepared to participate in the Soviet moon exploration program, and who denied many years of rumors that the American astronauts were not on the moon, and the footage broadcast on television around the world was allegedly mounted in Hollywood.

        http://ria.ru/science/20090720/177908258.html#ixzz3uwYv8PMf

        And where is the evidence that the Americans were on the moon? The only thing I heard was that it was supposedly ignorance to believe that the Yankees were not on the moon. And there was no evidence yet! And why, the US still cannot provide evidence to stop "speculation" on this topic?
        1. _Vladislav_
          _Vladislav_ 21 December 2015 13: 15
          +5
          Quote: Stas157
          And where is the evidence that the Americans were on the moon? The only thing I heard was that it was supposedly ignorance to believe that the Yankees were not on the moon. And there was no evidence yet! And why, the US still cannot provide evidence to stop "speculation" on this topic?

          Quote: Loreal
          The comrade as the party is twisting by reference ... the moon, having chastised the moon for the public to fail with N-1, was simply given to the Americans. The spacecraft could be assembled in low Earth orbit as the ISS was now assembled.

          Quote: Scoun
          Despite the great respect for Leonov, I dare to note that delivering an "antenna" to the Moon, which at the appointed time should be cut in and start broadcasting the necessary material, is much easier than delivering a person, and if a scam took place then the scale of the scam was

          In short, the people, all our discussion about the empty. I can endlessly give some kind of links, comments of people, and a critical-minded society will constantly say that this is not proof.

          And you yourself have brought at least one evidence that the Americans were not on the moon? You are replicating with pictures where there is supposedly wind, the shadow does not fall in the right direction - and where are the guarantees that your material is not photoshop?

          P.E. dear comrades. Here is what I will tell you. Russia plans to launch a satellite to the moon that will make it possible to take highly detailed images, and dispel all the rumors (or confirm them).

          https://hi-tech.mail.ru/news/russians-to-find-out-if-us-visited-moon/

          In the meantime, I propose to stop speculating, well, for a while, we remain for now in our opinion. All the same, neither I nor you have direct evidence.
        2. Bayonet
          Bayonet 21 December 2015 13: 39
          -3
          Quote: _Vladislav_
          I can endlessly give some kind of links, comments of people, and a critical-minded society will constantly say that this is not proof.

          Occupation, for a certain audience, frankly speaking useless ...
        3. Stas157
          Stas157 21 December 2015 13: 52
          +3
          Quote: _Vladislav_
          And you yourself have brought at least one evidence that the Americans were not on the moon?

          So we must not prove it, but the Americans! What and how to prove to us if this was not for us? But the evidence and opinions that the moon landing is a fake, more than enough! And not a single evidence! Why?
        4. Vadim237
          Vadim237 21 December 2015 15: 23
          -7
          The evidence that the Americans on the moon was a mountain unlike any Shirlotan speculation, and here is the confirmation that Saturn 5 rockets flew -F 1 engines found in the Atlantic Ocean
        5. Nirvanko
          Nirvanko 21 December 2015 16: 40
          +9
          Wow, come on. This is what you brought a mountain of evidence. And we thought that the take-off of Saturn-5 was fake.
        6. cuzmin.mihail2013
          cuzmin.mihail2013 21 December 2015 17: 46
          +5
          Well, they flew. But whether the big question reached? !!! In the meantime, I see that only to the bottom of the sea. And there is so much space debris from Earth’s orbit that you can dig around and find an alien ship.
          In general, no matter how many arguments "for" or "against", drawing on scientific knowledge from mathematics, physics, astronomy, right up to human psychology, the truth will be established only when a live broadcast from the astronaut landing site is shown (the lander , footprints of people, flag). Until then, the question will remain open!
        7. shamil
          shamil 22 December 2015 21: 47
          +1
          Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  • shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 46
    +1
    Of course, I apologize for being late, but it's too early to end the conversation. Watch the video and believe your eyes - were these people in space for a week? (And went to diapers for themselves) Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  • Temples
    Temples 21 December 2015 13: 10
    10
    Quote: _Vladislav_
    Here are the people, info and the point of view of the Soviet cosmonaut Alexei Leonov, who personally was preparing to participate in the Soviet moon exploration program,

    Leonov has repeatedly expressed his opinion.
    But this is only one opinion out of a million.
    He has the same relation to American flights to the moon as you do.

    But your opinion is unique!
    Soviet satellite in orbit of the moon photographed the landing of Neil Armstrong on the lunar surface

    Taking a picture of Amstrong at the exit is just awesome!
    Belief in American supremacy simply knows no bounds !!!

    That's just the toilet for their astronauts can not do, but otherwise just out of reach!
    1. nvn_co
      nvn_co 21 December 2015 16: 17
      +4
      How do you do that? Americans are smart, you can't talk about them like that, but you are talking about the toilet ... The president told them - you have to believe ... They are in one "popular science fiction" film about the flight to the moon, with Tom Hanks, using a sock, a box and electrical tape reduced the amount of CO2 on board ... And everyone believed that Mona, however! After the release of the "Martian" for hire, you see, in 10 years they fly to Mars ... laughing
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. atalef
      atalef 21 December 2015 13: 24
      +2
      Quote: Temples
      Leonov has repeatedly expressed his opinion. But this is only one out of a million. He has the same attitude to flying to the moon as you

      Well, probably all the same, he’s a little more in the subject than you, I and millions (if not billions) of others.
    3. Scoun
      Scoun 21 December 2015 13: 35
      +5
      Quote: atalef
      Well, probably all the same, he’s a little more in the subject than you

      Atalef))) so the trick is precisely this))) only a few people need to be convinced, such as Khrushchev, Korolev, and if they believed and told the whole world that it’s true then millions of people take their word for it))) herd reflex still no one has canceled for people)))
      Quote: _Vladislav_
      And you yourself have brought at least one evidence that the Americans were not on the moon?

      But no one answered how they protected themselves from radiation.
      Quote: GDP
      8. Radiation irradiation of astronauts (?!).
      9. Radio monitoring of the Apollo flight path to the USSR was not carried out (officially confirmed). In addition, even the USSR at that time successfully imitated radio communications with the Earth on the AMS Luna, as if it were manned flights.

      There are a lot of questions, but when that will dot the Y.
    4. atalef
      atalef 21 December 2015 13: 48
      +1
      Quote: Scoun
      Atalef))) so the trick is precisely this))) only a few people need to be convinced, such as Khrushchev, Korolev

      You know, Americans flew deeply violet to the moon or not.
      I will erase this matter much easier
      You all . lovers of backstage conspiracies differ in that in their desire to find confirmation of their theories do not look at the most elementary logic.
      I'm not saying that you are not convinced by hundreds of photographs, reports, documents, tens of thousands of people who worked in this program, the opinion of intelligence services, etc. etc.
      But as soon as one incomprehensible hairy face appeared, in the twilight and whispered something that suits you - you immediately cling to it as an indisputable fact. not requiring any evidence.
      And I, here’s not so sure, I would have someone (and preferably myself - a whistleblower, such as Kubrick) - as I proved
      1. Well, firstly. that this man is Kubrick
      2. Next - why filmed an interview in the dark
      3. evidence (elementary) where it was filmed (I'm talking about moon shots). when. who participated. who oversaw from the government,
      elementary - appearances, passwords, coherent
      and so --- I do not believe
      And you would not believe. if this person (like Kubrick) - would say like
      I am Kubrick and 100% affirm. NASA was on the moon.
    5. Scoun
      Scoun 21 December 2015 14: 54
      +6
      Quote: atalef
      You know, Americans flew deeply violet to the moon or not.

      Yes, in general, it’s exactly the same for the majority, all the more so if in our school a student responds that a person’s foot hasn’t stepped on the moon, he will receive a deuce.
      Quote: atalef
      You all . lovers of backstage conspiracies differ in that in their desire to find

      Yes, it was not at all we started))) the Americans themselves were the first to doubt it, and they began to ask a number of questions. I hope you don’t think all Americans are completely stupid?
      Quote: atalef
      But once an incomprehensible hairy face appeared

      But again ... it is not we who put this video in and it is not we who attach such importance to the fact that this "muzzle" or rather why exactly Kubrick S. has such an influence on those events ... and why P. Murray puts it
      Director T. Patrick Murray Interviews Stanley Kubrick three days before his death in March 1999. Previously he was forced to sign 88-page non-disclosure agreement (NDA) of interview content for 15 years from the date of Kubrick’s death.

      It’s Patrick who needs to ask a question why he shot so and why he signed such an agreement
      And if these issues were discussed here, it would be more logical))) and the people would blame the devil for what ... why. just to blame?
      All these discussions began with a handout of the Americans themselves and Kubrick was not afraid of us, and in general we only discuss the discussion of the Americans themselves and those who joined them, and the people even purely for themselves discuss certain issues / nuances about landing on the moon.
    6. Temples
      Temples 21 December 2015 16: 10
      12
      You know, Americans flew deeply violet to the moon or not.
      I will erase this matter much easier
      You all . backstage lovers


      atalef, yes what conspiracies.

      It's just ridiculous how many people puff out their cheeks and snot from their nose bubble on this subject.

      After all, everything is easier than steamed turnip -
      once again to fly there and all business something.

      In the meantime, no one has grown together either repeatedly or for the first time to jump on the moon - so will be the supporters of the lunatics and their opponents.

      How many specialists are on the site !!!

      Itself won how many points.
      Also special!
      And in Crimea there was a plate and saw Leonov and you know, and probably Lenin’s grandfather in the mausoleum.
      So apart from the truth, nothing comes out of your mouth.
      And all who do not agree with you are conspirators! laughing
    7. Bayonet
      Bayonet 21 December 2015 18: 00
      -6
      [quote = Temples] It's just ridiculous how many people puff out their cheeks and snot from their nose bubble on this subject. [/ quote
      hi
  • shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 49
    +2
    But without logic, watch the video and draw a conclusion. Thanks to the opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  • Corsair
    Corsair 21 December 2015 19: 16
    +4
    Quote: _Vladislav_
    Here are the people, the info for you and the point of view of the Soviet cosmonaut Alexei Leonov, who personally prepared to participate in the Soviet moon exploration program, and who denied many years of rumors that the American astronauts were not on the moon, and the footage broadcast on television around the world was allegedly mounted in Hollywood.

    laughing There is such a definition as "the decision of the party" or, as they usually say, "the general line of the party", and so the line then was to support the amers (by reason or stupidity or whatever) Let's talk sensibly -
    1. who would then oppose the party?
    2. can / should any astronaut sit in the MCC and observe what is happening in space - where is this said?
    3. if a person 40 years old said one thing (adult man) - can he (having substituted his colleagues) say something else?
    1. shamil
      shamil 22 December 2015 21: 51
      +2
      Bravo. My thoughts Leonov right man, ordered to say so, but now there is no one to withdraw the order.
  • shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 41
    0
    The famous Soviet cosmonaut A. Leonov honestly fulfills his obligations to the CPSU - not to reveal the truth.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • unsinkable
    unsinkable 21 December 2015 16: 10
    +5
    Quote: Bayonet
    Well, crawl on the Internet, or laziness? There are photos from satellites!

    You * climbed *? Show. hi
  • Simon
    Simon 21 December 2015 12: 29
    +4
    The photo can be faked. The Americans are good at this, take the movie Star Wars as an example, it was coolly done, like in space, but filmed on Earth.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 22 December 2015 10: 01
      -2
      Quote: Simon
      Photo can be faked

      And clone you! Only benefit from this no! hi
  • Gunther
    Gunther 21 December 2015 11: 34
    12
    _Vladislav_ (2) Today, 10: 57 ↑ A Soviet satellite in orbit of the moon photographed the landing of Neil Armstrong on the lunar surface, as well as the flag, the ship itself. So you can safely stop speculating around this.

    Where can I see the photographs "made by the Soviet satellite"?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Nyrobsky
    Nyrobsky 21 December 2015 11: 38
    +4
    Quote: _Vladislav_
    A Soviet satellite in orbit of the moon photographed the landing of Neil Armstrong on the lunar surface, as well as the flag, the ship itself.

    There is no wind on the moon.
    Question - What fluttered the American flag in the photo?
    1. Extraneous
      Extraneous 21 December 2015 11: 43
      +7
      Physics fluttered the flag. This question has long been chewed and digested.
      1. shamil
        shamil 22 December 2015 21: 54
        -1
        The flag did not flutter. More precisely, he deviated in one direction. those. there was no oscillatory movement, and the breeze blew in one direction. But watch the video fact. Hooray. Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
    2. Lukich
      Lukich 21 December 2015 11: 49
      +2
      Quote: Nyrobsky
      Question - What fluttered the American flag in the photo?

      springs. he was in a collapsed position. by the way, solar panels also flutter when opened
    3. Lukich
      Lukich 21 December 2015 12: 31
      +2
      Quote: Nyrobsky
      Question - What fluttered the American flag in the photo?

      “The argument is that the American flag was waving on the moon, but it shouldn't. The flag really should not be fluttering - the fabric was used with a rather rigid reinforced mesh, the cloth was twisted into a tube and tucked into a cover. The astronauts took a nest with them, which they first inserted into the lunar soil, and then stuck the flag pole into it, and only then took off the cover. And when the cover was removed, the flag cloth began to unfold in conditions of low gravity, and the residual deformation of the springy reinforced mesh created the impression that the flag was flapping like in the wind " , - explained the "phenomenon" Alexey Leonov.

      RIA Novosti http://ria.ru/science/20090720/177908258.html#ixzz3uwiErVrD
      1. Scoun
        Scoun 21 December 2015 18: 00
        +4
        Quote: Lukich
        The flag really should not fly - the fabric was used with a rather rigid reinforced mesh, the cloth was twisted into a tube and tucked into a cover. Astronauts took a nest with them, which they first inserted into the lunar soil, and then stuck the flagpole into it, and only then removed the cover.

        I don’t argue))) but take a look at the videos themselves)) what stupid springs? they live their life however)))
        This video was the very first that the search engine posted ... I did not specifically search for it (by the way, the whole YouTube is littered with similar videos from different sources) ..
        1. stroybat ZABVO
          stroybat ZABVO 21 December 2015 20: 09
          +7
          on the video @ from the moon @ stones and dust from under the feet of the @ astronaut @ fall on the @ moon @ faster than the @ astronaut falls @, but you have to fall together, yes, Watson? probably did not obey the director, gee gee gee.
        2. dzeredzavkomimu
          dzeredzavkomimu 21 December 2015 23: 57
          +3
          Well, they themselves said that they reshooted the landing, because the negligent employee erased everything)))
  • Rustic i ......
    Rustic i ...... 21 December 2015 12: 24
    +2
    By the way, the installation of the country's flag at the North Pole is shown in a very vital way in the film about the submarine commander Goryunov. Wouldn't be like ...... And with regard to the moon, from the very beginning I did not believe that the Americans had put up a flag. They could have lost, but not delivered. All the usual show-off, so that the whole world, and at the same time its own population, would believe in the "exclusiveness" of the United States, and then in infallibility.
    "Why are we not flying the moon then? There are engines, there is a possibility." - We have no beds there, and it's not the season for mushrooms. (I remembered the phrase: if you are so smart, then why don't you go in formation?)
  • Simon
    Simon 21 December 2015 12: 26
    -1
    It all comes down to money. The flight of astronauts to the moon is very expensive.
    1. Bratkov Oleg
      Bratkov Oleg 21 December 2017 12: 46
      0
      The Americans did not fly into space at all for another 10 years after the flight of Gagarin. Only after Gagarin’s flight did they begin to develop their technology, in fact, from scratch, and they couldn’t even visit the moon.
      But what a slap in the face of US pride, what a blow to their prestige!
      Therefore, they decided to lie, they had nowhere to go. The lies and bribery of the USSR, allowed oil to be sold, and perhaps the sons of the communist leaders were robbing something neatly ... And by the time of the first flight of American astronauts, it was either the Apollo Union, or their previous flight, the USSR could have landed a man on the Moon if would not be a conspiracy with the United States.
  • spolo
    spolo 21 December 2015 12: 56
    +3
    And bruce ivanych willis also saved the planet from armagendon
  • nvn_co
    nvn_co 21 December 2015 13: 09
    0
    Where is that said?
  • mark2
    mark2 21 December 2015 16: 20
    0
    Why aren’t we going to fly the moon? Engines are, there is an opportunity. At the same time, they would have put the Russian flag.


    and what to do there on this moon? And what profit? Do not forget. Capital rules the world. Until flights to the moon begin to bring profit at least in perspective, they will not fly there.
    1. Bratkov Oleg
      Bratkov Oleg 21 December 2017 12: 51
      0
      The USSR could fly back in the early 80s, and a man who had trodden along the Moon could notice something interesting there, which neither the camera would show, nor the camera.
  • shamil
    shamil 22 December 2015 21: 38
    +1
    But you can’t fly there in general. This opus here on the fingers explains that radiation is garbage, so eager as if it knocks dollars down. When this main physical problem is solved, then one can seriously talk about the flight of a person further 300 km from the Earth. And it’s useful to deal with technical problems, but rather robots will fly.
  • Bratkov Oleg
    Bratkov Oleg 21 December 2017 10: 07
    0
    We are not flying to the moon because we are no longer the USSR, the population has become half as much, a significant part of the space industry has been destroyed by the Americans, and now it’s fresh - they stopped working with Ukrainian space plants. This is the United States destroyed, their handiwork. In addition, everyone who flies to the moon receives US sanctions. Well, China is economically stupid, and even the Oil Hare has “broken”, but the USA managed to blackmail it with moon pictures. Anyone flying to the moon before the Americans get there is a crime against democracy, humanity, etc. And the USA will take any measures ... Politics!
  • Lukich
    Lukich 21 December 2015 11: 39
    +3
    Quote: armored optimist
    So, if this is true, then further disclosures must be expected. If there are none, then fake.

    previously there were similar stuffings and all turned out to be fakes.
    Thus, the American astronaut Brian O'Leary, answering a direct question, said that "he cannot give a 100% guarantee that Neil Armstrong and Edwin Aldrin really visited the moon."

    why did he turn arrows on others. you have to answer for yourself ...
  • amber-50
    amber-50 21 December 2015 12: 51
    +5
    For some reason, I think that this whole "lunar American program" was created only for one thing, to force to invest huge funds in the lunar program of the USSR. Thus, putting the country's economy on the w ... y. But somewhere, the amers have something it went awry once there were people who wanted to report on the filmed lunar series. Remember, the jambs in the video shot on the moon appeared almost immediately.
    1. Bratkov Oleg
      Bratkov Oleg 21 December 2017 12: 32
      0
      The USSR did this on its own, and independently, it was going to fly to the moon. And on Mars, too, the projects were calculated too. Further, the United States bought the USSR, offering to sell oil to countries. From that moment on, stable supplies of hydrocarbons to Western Europe began, for hard currency, and even Obama, who "torn to shreds the Russian economy", did not dare to touch one of Russia's most important sources of income. Lying in exchange for currency. And the USSR in response to this canceled the draft N-1.
      Already the 7th launch, the designers promised to make a trouble-free, and from the 12th manned flights were supposed to begin. The USSR could begin exploration of the moon in the early 80s, and the United States would disappear from the scene of history. But it turned out another option, rats from the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR privatized the country, and the United States did their best to this.
  • little man
    little man 21 December 2015 21: 20
    +1
    and it was always strange for me to listen to how some wise scientists argued that the Americans were on the moon, while others disproved them. I’m not strong in sciences (Vasya’s dad is stronger in mathematics), therefore, I believed everyone! wink
    1. shamil
      shamil 22 December 2015 21: 57
      +1
      But I suggest not listening, but watching a self-revealing American video. And believe your eyes. Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  • kalibr
    kalibr 22 December 2015 13: 48
    0
    Surprisingly, for some reason, no one remembers the stones from the moon. And they were delivered more than 150 kg. And they were handed out to laboratories of different countries for research. And we noted that our sample of lunar soil delivered by Moon-16 coincided with the American one. Fake excluded. There are a lot of HELIA-3 in the lunar soil. Because of what on the moon so though the Chinese. Their entire project is based on this, you can take an interest in the Network. And that stones are also fiction, and the Chinese just decided to play along with the Americans? Why would it all be?
    1. shamil
      shamil 22 December 2015 22: 01
      +1
      Our production is 330g, American 300kg. For stealing an American-lifelong. Why did they bring cobblestones if they don’t give anyone? We rigolit, they have soil samples, they must be different. Where are the differences? Those. our rigolit was investigated by everyone, but not American. Watch the video. Believe your eyes. Thanks to the opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
      1. opus
        opus 23 December 2015 01: 45
        0
        Quote: shamil
        We rigolit, they have soil samples, they must be different. Where are the differences? Those. our rigolit was investigated by everyone, but not American.

        Repeat:

        "Infrared transmission spectra of regolith from the sea of ​​tranquility" M.V. Akhmanova, AV Karjakin, LS Tarasov, p. 525 "Lunar soil from the sea of ​​abundance".


        "The authors had samples" - is the meaning clear?


        You can read the full here (in Russian)


        You can analyze the tuta (in English):







        Quote: shamil
        Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e.


        repeat:

        According to your logic: there were no Lunokhodov. Everything was filmed at Mosfilm.
        -------------------------------------
        Something you started reminding me of kaklov, with their Black Sea dug in spoons and with the submarines Kozakov
        1. shamil
          shamil 23 December 2015 06: 39
          +2
          My logic is straightforward, one and direct. It is impossible to hide that which you have no idea. The Americans did not know about the influence of weightlessness and this is the main puncture. I’ll look at the video later — it’s time to work. But the descent vehicle with burnt TZP should not shine with pure aluminum metal. And who is this? I am new here. Own vocabulary is not enough for decryption.
          1. opus
            opus 23 December 2015 18: 31
            0
            Quote: shamil
            The Americans did not know about the influence of weightlessness and this is the main puncture.

            At the end of the 40s of the XX century, physicians and engineers of ALL countries were already familiar with the reaction of the human body and animals to overload, vibration, noise and other factors of aircraft flights. However, they did not have experimental data on the biological effect of weightlessness.

            The Americans sent a batch of flies into space on February 20, 1947 aboard the V2 rocket (FAU-2).

            First a suborbital flight on the same V2 rocket (with number 47) was set off by a monkey nicknamed Albert-2.

            The rocket climbed to a height of 133,9 kilometers, at the right time the cabin with the animal separated, the parachute opened on time ... but the first animal in space died (found dead when the capsule was opened). It’s worth adding that the first animal in space could be monkey Albert (1), however, his rocket did not reach the conventional boundary of space at an altitude of 100 km.
            (October 18, 1963, France, the cat Felicette: landed successfully, having been in space and zero gravity)


            Until the end of 1948, the V-2 with the White Sands started three more times: September 3, November 18 and December 9. The first two starts were successful, but during the third there was a little trouble with the engine. As a result, it was possible to reach a height of only 107 kilometers, much less than planned.

            The year 1949 was the last, when the intensity of the V-2 test launches can be called high. For 12 months have been 10 rockets launched.

            Operations "Sandy" and "Pushover", at the end of the 40s American launches of the Viking, Aerobi and others
            The launch of the Viking-5 was carried out on November 21, 1950, the maximum lifting height of the Viking-5 was only 175 kilometers. During the flight, it was possible to take many photographs of the earth’s surface from a great height. On August 7, 7, the Viking-1951 reached a maximum height of 219 kilometers, on May 24, 1954, the Viking-11 took off to a height of 254 kilometers .. and so on: “Bumper -WAK "," Native "(code of the Ministry of Defense of the USA МХ-770А)," Conveyor "," Corporal "," Nike-Deacon "," Nike-Cajun "," Nike-Ajax ", The first American ballistic missile" Redstone "( 1953) ..

            VRK "Rokun": July 29, 1952 launch of a single-stage rocket "Deacon" from a height of 20 kilometers. A Skyhook balloon was used as a missile delivery vehicle for this one.

            X-Series aircraft: program since 1940

            In the late 1940s - early 1950s in the United States were dozens of rocket types created and tested. I talked about the most interesting developments.

            This period of development of rocket technology in the United States cannot be underestimated: the Americans succeeded make a breakthrough in rocket science. If you recall with what “backlog” they began their work in 1945 and with what rockets they possessed ten years later, this is “earth and sky” ...

            September 20, 1956, when with the help of Redstone at number 27 it reached altitude of 1096 kilometers, which at that time was an absolute record. The system described above was named "Jupiter-S" and in 1958 was used to launch the first American Earth satellite.
            Do you think this is a puncture? and not knowledge of zero gravity?
            Well yes, yes ...
            1. opus
              opus 23 December 2015 18: 32
              0
              Released in 1950, the film by Destination: Moon directed by producer George Pal and directed by Irwin Pitchel based on Robert Heinlein’s novel "Missile ship" Galileo "" and with his active participation.

              Jane Fonda All Nude Scenes From Barbarella 1968


              then Kurt Newmann’s film “Rocketship XM”: The first flight to the moon due to an accident turns out to be a failure, but in exchange the crew landed on Mars in compensation ..

              When Worlds Collide, 1951, Forbidden Planet, 1956, The Incredible Shrinking Man, 1957, etc.


              =======================================
              Of course, the Americans are so dumb (Zadornov) that they did not read Copernicus’s brilliant work “On the Reversals of the Celestial Spheres”, and also did not know that the English industrialist William Watts in 1782 took a patent for the production of shots by dropping drops of molten lead from a high tower . Phell, the drops were in a state of weightlessness, acquired a spherical shape and managed to harden before they reached the ground. And three years later, the same Watts for this purpose built the first tower in Bristol.
              Quote: shamil
              And who is this?

              Svidomo kakl? Watch the video!
              https://vk.com/video-71250135_169518791
    2. Lev Leshchenko
      Lev Leshchenko 22 December 2015 22: 11
      +1
      Quote: kalibr
      Surprisingly, for some reason, no one remembers the stones from the moon.


      Why, remember regularly. But the fate of this soil and the history of its transfer to the USSR are so vague that there is reason to doubt.

      About NASA soil transferred to the USSR:
      http://qoo.by/9YO


      The story of the stone presented to the Dutch prime minister also fuels suspicion:

      The Apollo 11 moonstone turned out to be a fake:
      http://lenta.ru/news/2009/08/28/fake/
      1. opus
        opus 23 December 2015 01: 59
        0
        Quote: Lev Leshchenko
        . But the fate of this soil and the history of its transfer to the USSR are so vague that there is reason to doubt.

        In February 1971, an agreement on the mutual transfer of lunar soil was concluded between the USSR and the USA. Six months pass, and the Soviet Union proactively transfers to the States a few grams of its soil. Almost a year passed, and in April 1972, the Americans handed over HUNDRED grams of lunar soil samples.






        (Page 159. NASA Report)



        Do not believe NASA, oops ...
        News?

        The authors "had samples" - is the meaning clear?

        May be useful:

        ready to send the whole (!) file.
        last record № 3236:
        Zook HA, Hartung JB and Storzer D. (1977) Solar flare activity: Evidence for large-scale changes in the past. Icarus 32, 106-126. 1977 Zook HA, Hartung JB and Storzer D. Solar flare activity: Evidence for large-scale changes in the past. Icarus 32, 106-126.
        323 kg / 3236 is decent, don’t you?
        3236 recipients worldwide !!!

        three English uni: Manchester, Leicester and Gull. On the first page are three Apollo 12 dust samples weighing 3,04 гр. and two samples of stones at 7,45 g. Sample numbers are indicated


        Paris Observatory in conjunction with the Universities of Gulya and Manchester, in the United Kingdom. And right on the first page:
        Of the material brought by Apollo-11, we received 10-1 g of lunar fines of grain size under 1 mm from the bulk sample, and 11 chips of total weight 10-8 g from the following 5 rocks and breccias:


        The following are 5 different stones with sample numbers. Total another 20,9 grams.
        well and so on and so on ..
        1. opus
          opus 23 December 2015 02: 06
          0
          You know Lev Leshchenko, with your stupidity and stubbornness you begin to remind me of the well-known "political scientist" Olesya Yakhno - Troll from Through the Looking Glass.

          /Excuse me

          Quote: Lev Leshchenko
          A story with a stone

          the tape (c) ru - comments are unnecessary.
          There 99% downs, managers = a hole from a hole will not be distinguished
          1. Lev Leshchenko
            Lev Leshchenko 23 December 2015 02: 45
            -2
            In terms of tenacity, you still have to compete.
            Merged - say so. No tantrums.
            1. opus
              opus 23 December 2015 18: 35
              0
              Quote: Lev Leshchenko
              you still have to compete.

              with you".
              I didn’t drink sour beer with thrashers at the Brudershaft. Do you have a dream?
              Quote: Lev Leshchenko
              Merged - say so.

              I AM ? Merged?
              Aren't you funny?
              Well-honed logic and knowledge of facts (encyclopedic), for my part (90% I remember at school, university, and I read a lot), against bleating at the level

              / Do not scoff at the essence
        2. Lev Leshchenko
          Lev Leshchenko 23 December 2015 02: 44
          +1
          Quote: opus
          In February 1971, an agreement on the mutual transfer of lunar soil was concluded between the USSR and the USA.

          Dismantled it already. There is a link in the message to a large publication.
          If I’m too lazy to read, I’ll tell you: apart from the phrase "we had samples" there is not much evidence of the presence of this soil.
          1. opus
            opus 23 December 2015 18: 46
            0
            Quote: Lev Leshchenko
            evidence of the presence of this soil is not much.

            la la
            3236 recipients worldwide !!!
            This soil.
            I indicated the first fifty, I’m ready to send all 3236, It’s not difficult to ask them: how much they received, what they did, etc.
            uh huh ... "Not much"







            In any case, I will believe M.V. Akhmanov, A.V. Karyakin, L.S. Tarasov, Yu.I. Stakheev

            y and the Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry. V. I. Vernadsky
            USSR Academy of Sciences (With the advent of the space age, the Institute became the head in the field of exploration of the moon and planets) than chatterbox balabolam.
            Yes, even if Lev Valeryanovich himself began to carry the tuff,what are you talking about: I would not believe him
            1. Bratkov Oleg
              Bratkov Oleg 24 August 2017 18: 46
              0
              You have planned so much snowstorm, a lie of hundreds of kilograms, like a fake lunar soil from pindocs ...

              The USA did not fly into space until the end of the 60s - the beginning of the 70s. Soyuz-Apollo was the first or second orbital flight of the Americans, and you rub the blizzard about hundreds of kilograms of lunar soil. I would say that you are not a simple dumbass, but a rare one. Only suckers can believe in a flight to the moon, and those who receive money for this. If you were even a little literate, you would compare the structure of the Vostok ships, for example, or later, and American Gemini. How the astronaut’s chair is located, for example, how hatches are arranged, how much free space there is for two weeks, for example, to fly to Jemeni in Earth’s orbit. If they had even the slightest technical knowledge, and not propaganda enthusiasm, they would have realized that it is impossible to enter the Earth’s orbit in Gemeni. And Amstrong type and flew to Jameny, so he still does not know what the stars look like in space. He was not even a fighter pilot, at least sometimes they have the opportunity to look at the stars.
    3. Bratkov Oleg
      Bratkov Oleg 21 December 2017 12: 41
      0
      Not a single laboratory in the world received a single gram of American soil!
      This is an ordinary lie of lying Americans. Well, Trump has already stated to the whole world that ISIS has been defeated by America in Syria, and they will always adhere to this version. So with the Moon, they then poked directly into the lying American face that it was all crap and nonsense, but the United States stood firmly on its own: "We were on the Moon, stars are not visible!"
      Marx also wrote that there is no such obstacle that capital cannot overcome for profit, and there are no laws that it will not cross.
  • 79807420129
    79807420129 21 December 2015 10: 52
    31
    I forgot to add that Russia also delivers US astronauts to the ISS, once and then not a long time ago delivered the Amer Dragon, and then it was a private project, not NASA, you say peacocks, heh.
    1. clidon
      clidon 21 December 2015 11: 18
      +2
      once and then not a long time ago the Amersky Dragon delivered and then it was a private project,

      Dragon has flown to the ISS 7 times already.
      1. Bratkov Oleg
        Bratkov Oleg 24 August 2017 18: 53
        0
        They even had shuttles, launched 70 tons into orbit at a time for American money. Only the payload was much smaller. For example, Energia, of its total mass, had 4 percent of the payload, yes, it flew once, then the USSR disappeared, and the shuttle only 1,4 percent of the payload of its starting mass. The Proton rocket accounts for 2,9 percent of the mass per payload.
        And the Mars rover Curiosity launched the Russian engine into space, and there is a Russian nuclear power source on the rover, as well as a Russian device for detecting water in the ground. Not so Americans and independent.
        1. clidon
          clidon 21 December 2017 07: 54
          0
          The energy flew twice, and the characteristics of the Buran and the shuttle in terms of load output are similar.
          Moreover, it is worth talking about what is happening now. And now the Americans are famously moving forward.
  • veksha50
    veksha50 21 December 2015 11: 05
    10
    Quote: 79807420129
    vague doubts torment me, the Americans visited the moon, and on the other hand they buy rocket engines from us,



    I fully support ... This is what I often thought about - how so, to fly to the Moon, and not solve the problem with the engine they needed so many years ...

    It is precisely this fact that causes confusion ...

    Although there is no trust in this statement of Kubrick ... The whole modern world has perverted, and the truth has become so rare both in the coverage of historical events and in the present that you can’t stop being surprised ...
  • Bayonet
    Bayonet 21 December 2015 11: 26
    +8
    Quote: 79807420129
    they buy rocket engines from us,

    They have talked about this so many times, explained and chewed - why they buy the RD-180, that repeating again is no longer funny! request
    1. Zefr
      Zefr 21 December 2015 18: 27
      +4
      Quote: Bayonet
      they buy rocket engines from us,

      They have talked about this so many times, explained and chewed - why they buy the RD-180, that repeating again is no longer funny!

      Well, actually, they bought the NK-33, the very engines from the very Soviet N-1 rocket, which was supposed to fly to the moon.
      These engines are 40 years old.
      As for the engines of Saturn, there are discussions on it in the network, including the words of the Queen that these engines will not work. And there are measurements of the speed of the Saturn rocket from film footage, which confirm that the Saturn could not accelerate to its design speeds, and may not even have been able to enter orbit. And in my opinion, this is the most important argument - physically, the rocket could not fly away.
      And if you add that Apollo had an insufficient heat shield, which did not save when entering the atmosphere at the speed of returning from the moon, that the American astronauts did not have a toilet, and that upon their return they briskly walked to conferences and television shows without taking off their spacesuits, when the astronauts after a three-day flight could not leave the ship themselves, and still a lot of inconsistencies.
      Still, vague doubts torment me that they could fly there.
      And Leonov - he has nowhere to go, if there was a scam, he was implicated in it by the most unbearable.
      1. atalef
        atalef 21 December 2015 18: 34
        -5
        Quote: Zefr
        As for the engines of Saturn, there are discussions on it in the network, including the words of the Queen that these engines will not work. And there are measurements of the speed of the Saturn rocket from film footage, which confirm that the Saturn could not accelerate to its design speeds, and may not even have been able to enter orbit. And in my opinion, this is the most important argument - physically, the rocket could not fly away.

        i.e. is she still hanging in orbit?
        or was she anihilated in the air?
        Quote: Zefr
        And if you add there that Apollo had an insufficient heat shield that did not save when entering the atmosphere at the speed of return from the Moon

        which screen? she didn’t take off?
        truth can enlighten. where did you fall?
        And so 7 times (in my opinion)
        Quote: Zefr
        that American astronauts did not have a toilet

        Of course (they didn’t have Skylab), and if it was. then they flew there in diapers

        Quote: Zefr
        and that upon returning they walked briskly at conferences and television shows, without taking off their occupied spacesuits, when the astronauts, after a three-day flight, could not leave the ship themselves

        Look at the same shuttle returns.
        There they walk the same way. or shuttles were the same?

        Quote: Zefr
        and still a lot of inconsistent

        In your words first of all.
        1. Zefr
          Zefr 21 December 2015 20: 10
          +4
          Quote: atalef
          i.e. is she still hanging in orbit?
          or was she anihilated in the air?

          She fell. Look at the photo of the engine in the ocean.
          Quote: atalef
          which screen? she didn’t take off?
          truth can enlighten. where did you fall?
          And so 7 times (in my opinion)

          Why shouldn't he take off? But to return without a screen - no, no. This was shown by the Columbia shuttle. Because without protection at the first cosmic speed in the atmosphere, the ship is destroyed. You will not deny the fact that Columbia died from the fact that a small piece of the protective screen was damaged? And Apollo has no protective shield at all. Like the Gemini. How did they enter the atmosphere from orbit from the second, and even from the first cosmic speed? But the Shuttle has protection. Well, how is it?
          Quote: atalef
          "that American astronauts did not have a toilet"
          Of course (they didn’t have Skylab), and if it was. then they flew there in diapers

          Skylab is an amazing station in general. And apparently, technically impossible. And they didn't have a toilet. In Gemini, which "flew" for three days, as a toilet, the diagram shows ... a kitchen thermos. HOW, how did they use it ???
          Quote: atalef
          Look at the same shuttle returns.
          There they walk the same way. or shuttles were the same?

          The shuttle is not the Apollo lunar ship, in which the space per person was 2 times less than in the Soyuz. And the experience of many months of flights was already a lot (ours). Therefore, the Americans already knew (from ours) that training was required. Our cosmonauts also went out with their own feet. Have learned.
          Quote: Zefr
          and still a lot of inconsistent
          In your words first of all.

          No.
  • inpu
    inpu 21 December 2015 11: 30
    +4
    Quote: 79807420129
    But hell knows? On the one hand, I am tormented by vague doubts, the Americans have visited the moon, and on the other hand they are buying rocket engines from us, and in the 2016 budget there is money for the purchase of our RD-180. Hollywood, however.

    They ruined their development with the shuttle program. Once done and until the resource is over they used it. As a result, a whole generation of developers were sitting idle. The old is ideologically outdated, and the new is raw and expensive.
    The same thing will happen if SpaceX put their first step backwards. A one-time reduction in price and a very probable stagnation for years.
    1. Bayonet
      Bayonet 22 December 2015 10: 50
      +2
      Quote: inpu
      The same thing will happen if SpaceX put their first step backwards.

      Already planted smile Just shown in the morning news. Well, does that mean Hollywood? laughing
  • kil 31
    kil 31 21 December 2015 11: 46
    +6
    Quote: 79807420129
    Quote: cniza
    Who needs such stuffing?

    But hell knows? On the one hand, I am tormented by vague doubts, the Americans have visited the moon, and on the other hand they are buying rocket engines from us, and in the 2016 budget there is money for the purchase of our RD-180. Hollywood, however.

    Well, this does not mean anything, as it’s more convenient to do so. I bought my daughter toys, to put all the Chinese under the tree. This does not mean that we cannot make toys and our children did not play before. Here is a toy for 1000 years.
    1. Temples
      Temples 21 December 2015 11: 57
      +5
      Yah!
      A toy in my opinion is 10 thousand years old!
      It is obvious!
      And the moon was launched into orbit by the Americans!
      This is also obvious!
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 22 December 2015 10: 52
        +1
        Quote: Temples
        And the moon was launched into orbit by the Americans!

        But you are not a patriot however! It smells of liberality! The moon was launched RUSSIAN !!!! am
        1. PHANTOM-AS
          PHANTOM-AS 23 December 2015 03: 01
          +3
          Quote: Bayonet

          But you are not a patriot however! It smells of liberality! The moon was launched RUSSIAN !!!!

          You are right, and that was exactly the day before the Flood, Kiselev first talked about this (he saw these secret archives), and then the bearded uncle on rent, the crew of the escort did not return. request
          Informed sources close to ...., they say that they are now living in a colony on the moon, but you know, everything is secret ...
  • SveTok
    SveTok 21 December 2015 12: 02
    -4
    These are not stuffing, but emissions of what actually happened.
  • Akella
    Akella 21 December 2015 12: 39
    +7
    Quote: 79807420129
    On the one hand, vague doubts torment me, the Americans visited the moon, and on the other ...

    But what if the Americans were on the moon and the filming took place on Earth? After all, the famous speech of Stalin on November 7, 1941 from the rostrum of the Mausoleum in front of military units going to the front is a historical fact. And the filming of this performance was made later in the Mosfilm pavilion.
    Maybe the same thing happened with the first landing of people on the moon?
    1. saruman
      saruman 21 December 2015 16: 46
      -2
      Quote: Akella
      But what if the Americans were on the moon and the filming took place on Earth? After all, the famous speech of Stalin on November 7, 1941 from the rostrum of the Mausoleum in front of military units going to the front is a historical fact. And the filming of this performance was made later in the pavilion of "Mosfilm". Could it be the same with the first landing of people on the moon?


      There is such a version. Allegedly, one NASA employee instead of copying the source record pressed erasure. Therefore, I had to remove the staged stay of the Americans on the moon. Since the USSR officially recognized the fact of the Americans landing on the moon, the rest was no longer important. And for some reason, the Americans themselves began to doubt ...
  • Lord of Wrath
    Lord of Wrath 21 December 2015 13: 39
    -3
    Quote: 79807420129
    On the one hand, vague doubts torment me, the Americans visited the moon,

    Have been on the moon and 6 (six) times, which has been repeatedly confirmed by our scientists and intelligence services
    The story with the "documentary" footage filmed about the landing on the moon also took place.
    The Americans feared that the flight would be unsuccessful and ordered films from 3's film studios.
    When I watched the film Apollo 13, I did not leave the feeling that poor Americans were sent to the moon in a "phone booth"
    1. shamil
      shamil 23 December 2015 05: 40
      +2
      Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look, there is a puncture on the puncture: the lander glistens, i.e. not burned upon entering the atmosphere, but simply thrown off the plane. Astronauts after the flight, having landed in earthly gravity with a flatbed, lying down, but they don’t care at all, they only smile shyly. And yes, they all went to the diapers all days according to NASA; that's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for a crime against the American people to cut $ 20 billion.
  • sovetskyturist
    sovetskyturist 21 December 2015 20: 11
    +3
    With the help of a super trampoline, probably. An interesting design of the module with which they sat on the moon, and by the way in the photo under it, is not a speck of dust. How did Van Allen's radiation belts overcome.
  • Dilshat
    Dilshat 21 December 2015 23: 28
    -1
    And if the landing of the Americans fake how they managed to persuade the USSR not to refute the greatest scam of all time of the existence of mankind. After the implementation of the lunar program, the USA proved that it was the most advanced, most advanced and the most other. It turns out that the USSR was bent. They sold their birthright in the scientific technological progress. Well, just like in the Bible about Esau and Jacob. What is wrong here.
  • Kanatbek
    Kanatbek 22 December 2015 10: 39
    -3
    They buy the most valuable from you - the Mi-8 rocket engines and helicopters for Afghanistan and Iraq, so that you don’t have enough for your programs!
    Also, for pennies, they launch their spacecraft with the help of your expensive missiles, so that your Soviet stocks run out faster! Fools! Come on!
  • OlegLex
    OlegLex 23 December 2015 19: 57
    0

    Leonov is for me personally an indisputable authority. And I really don’t understand who and why the hell need such stuffing, most likely just a cheap sensation, the journalist made grandmothers and everyone is happy
  • Blondy
    Blondy 23 August 2017 17: 41
    0
    Yes, of course, Stanley Kubrick ... But the difference between the inflated spacesuits of the repo from the Moon and the compressed air pressure of the spacesuits when shooting Kubrick immediately catches the eye. I'm not talking about the fact that all em traffic was easily taken by all very interested intelligence agencies. No disclosures have been received.
    О
  • volot-voin
    volot-voin 12 October 2018 14: 59
    0
    Quote: 79807420129
    But hell knows? On the one hand, I am tormented by vague doubts, the Americans visited the moon

    And Bruce Willis saved the earth from a meteorite, blowing it up at the cost of his life.
  • gfs84
    gfs84 21 December 2015 11: 00
    -4
    Who needs such stuffing?


    Someone who does not want to do anything, especially what can be proud of.

    It’s easier to screw up the merits of others than to do something worthwhile.

    Traces of landings are visible through a telescope.

    Although Kubrick most likely does not lie, it was probably backup records in case there was no telemetry.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • WKS
    WKS 21 December 2015 11: 40
    13
    The article is about the falsification of a direct report on the landing on the moon, but not about the falsification of the flight itself.
  • Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 21 December 2015 11: 55
    0
    In the lunar scam of the United States put a bullet!
    Why Putin didn't say anything on the "direct line"? that would be a "bomb"! laughing
  • Atrix
    Atrix 21 December 2015 12: 21
    -6
    Damn of course stuffing. There was a USSR at that time, and if the USA had not flown to the moon, then the Soviets would have smashed the USA for this lodge. Even Leonov said that the USSR was watching the flight of a manned ship and landing on the moon
  • Genur
    Genur 21 December 2015 13: 43
    +6
    A similar problem with the "Gemini" ... September 11
  • 23424636
    23424636 21 December 2015 13: 55
    +2
    when they deceived the whole world, and this is clearly due to the fact that they can’t repeat it, I really do not want to believe that it also became a sucker. The next puncture of foreign intelligence and the masters of eating the budget is catching up with the chimera. By the way, where did 200 kg of lunar soil disappear. Yes, it was not there.
  • shvn
    shvn 21 December 2015 22: 55
    0
    I think fools
  • valerei
    valerei 23 December 2015 18: 54
    0
    I once heard an interview with Leonov, so Leonov himself !! He did not deny the fact that the Americans landed on the moon. For some reason, I believe him more than this stuffing.
    1. Nerobot
      Nerobot 6 September 2017 11: 35
      0
      And I don’t believe Leonov, no one else. It’s enough to watch the first seconds of that video and ask who was shooting this landing if he was an astronaut only “took a step to the moon” and someone was shooting from the side, probably it was sleepwalkers.
  • Bratkov Oleg
    Bratkov Oleg 24 August 2017 14: 22
    +1
    The United States flew into space 10 years later than the USSR, and by no means, in any rainbow dream could not reach the moon. Technically competent people can see everything that is available under the program "Jameny", these devices of the type flew up to two weeks. astronauts landing there like on an airplane. That is, the head, in the direction of movement, at the very bottom, so that blood flows into it. Compare with the landing of the same Gagarin, in the East you can withstand 5-6 minutes, in "Jemeni it is impossible !!! Short-term overload on a fighter and more than 10 maybe a second, and it is sent there not in the direction of travel. In addition , almost without moving, to sit for two weeks in one position, in a spacesuit, in a ship with a square hatch on the piano hinges opening out !? That's why Amstrong did not see the stars on the moon, because he “flew” on the “Dzhemeni”, and "Gemini", which without a fairing, and even with directional portholes, in principle, could not bring an astronaut into space, and, accordingly, Amstrong is a complete American nonsense.
    Photo of the real "Gemini", between ... 1 and 3 ... no space or hyphen:
    http://topru.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/s65-1
    3244.jpg
  • ★ VLADIMIR ★
    ★ VLADIMIR ★ 28 August 2017 21: 54
    0
    ))) Ghu! The children's answer is a children's answer. For the INVISIBLE. And for the slow-witted I will explain.
    That the Americans didn’t have (6) moon landings until 1972. I’m not talking about the first one, supposedly July 25, 1969, since they had no engine before the roses of the USSR shaft, to restart and return from the moon to the earth. They appeared only thanks to Gorbachov. Where the American designers themselves honestly admitted.
    And those in the head have manure and sawdust. and with logic not so hot. A little hint for a little intelligence development. Why Americans allegedly brought 380 kg of moons of soil from the moon. And not one country in the world, including the allies, was given a single gram for study. He announced that this is American real estate, and he is not sharing with anyone who is not living. But when the USSR automatic station delivered lunar soil to the earth of some 100 grams. Then the Americans eagerly began to beg for themselves at least one gram - to study. For some reason, they forgot that they have as much as 380 kg. Any thoughts do not arise in the head. Yes, in the USSR they knew that there were no Americans on the moon. But why they were silent on this subject, I do not know.
    1. Nerobot
      Nerobot 6 September 2017 11: 55
      0
      And I can assume why our people knew but were silent because every loud exposure requires irrefutable evidence, we did not have them. And if there were, then every compromising evidence is a subject of bargaining. Perhaps our bargained some concessions on political issues, well, or something like that. Politics is a dirty business and all means are good to achieve the goal. As the brother of Sherlock Holmes said; Since you will not be dealing with criminals, but with politicians, do not believe a single word.
  • Nerobot
    Nerobot 6 September 2017 11: 18
    0
    Then it was a question of the superiority of socialism over capitalism, this is a political matter. After the launch of the first artificial satellite of the USSR, the rating of the communist parties of all countries, “and there were communist parties in the capitalist countries,” rose sharply, and after launching man into space, this was howl, the capitalists began to lose their positions and their allies urgently needed to surpass the Soviet Union. I think they really wanted to run people somewhere but something didn’t work and then they made a movie, but usa and now they do their job in propaganda and fake videos. So when you see the next video made in usa, don’t rush to believe.
  • Bratkov Oleg
    Bratkov Oleg 2 February 2018 13: 07
    0
    US attempts to prove that they were on the moon - stuffing, lies, nonsense.
    And only dumb, technically illiterate people believe in this American lie.
    By the way, Amstrong said that no stars are visible in space. In fact, there, to space, like this:
    https://aircargonews.ru/uploads/posts/2017-12/151
    3505759_app-astronaute-1920x1080.jpg
  • The comment was deleted.
  • ohtsistem
    ohtsistem 21 December 2015 10: 34
    13
    Well, finally - they brought the mattresses to clean water. Lying for hegemony in the world is their motto negative
    It’s necessary for so many years that everyone’s brains were powdered ... no words
    1. Vasilenko Vladimir
      Vasilenko Vladimir 21 December 2015 10: 36
      +8
      Quote: ohtsistem
      mattresses brought to clean water

      Who are you?
      1. subbtin.725
        subbtin.725 21 December 2015 10: 37
        0
        Plumbum has screwed up.
        1. Artyom
          Artyom 21 December 2015 10: 48
          29
          the funny thing is that the Americans cannot refute! No samples of lunar soil! He is somewhere ALL! Gone The original film shot by astronauts on the moon, too, no! There is only digital! Allegedly the whole film has decayed :))) in short, until new expeditions fly to the moon, this question will remain open.
          1. Scoun
            Scoun 21 December 2015 11: 03
            26
            Quote: Artyom
            the whole film has decayed :)))

            It did not decay, but there was a "fire" in the archive and destroyed the originals of the film and the USA announced that it was okay since there are copies of the type)))
            Just as quickly the steel rods of the twin towers left for disposal and now they are not to be given for examination.
            PS
            And yet no one ever answered how to overcome radiation on approaching the moon.
            The moon has no Van Allen belts. She also does not have a protective atmosphere. It is open to all solar winds. If a strong solar flare occurred during the lunar expedition, a colossal flux of radiation would incinerate both the capsules and the astronauts on that part of the lunar surface where they spent their day. This radiation is not just dangerous - it is deadly!

            In 1963, Soviet scientists told the famous British astronomer Bernard Lovell that they did not know a way to protect astronauts from the deadly effects of cosmic radiation. This meant that even much thicker metal shells of the Russian apparatus could not cope with radiation. How could the finest (almost like foil) metal used in American capsules protect astronauts? NASA knew this was impossible. Space monkeys died less than 10 days after their return, but NASA never told us the true reason for their death.

            Read more: http://www.km.ru/front-projects/amerikanzi-nikogda-ne-letali-na-lunu/vyshe-24-00
            0-km-nad-zemlei-radiatsiya-ubivaet-vse-zhivoe
            1. Ezhaak
              Ezhaak 21 December 2015 11: 56
              +1
              Quote: Scoun
              Read more: http://www.km.ru/front-projects/

              Since the 80s of the last century, I was sure that http://www.km.ru, it is such a http://www.km.ru. Better than British scientists studying the conversion of a non-Jewish sperm to a Jewish one inside the vagina of a Jewish woman. As a result, a 100% Jewish child will be born.
            2. GAF
              GAF 21 December 2015 16: 11
              +2
              Quote: Scoun
              It did not decay, but there was a "fire" in the archive and destroyed the originals of the film and the USA announced that it was okay since there are copies of the type)))

              That's it. Why take care of them. These are not family archives wedding films. But modern technologies that allow you to "chase" individual atoms and build nanostructures from them, will easily detect the difference in the photoemulsion of the original frame, shot on Earth and on the Moon in the absence of an atmosphere that protects us from cosmic radiation. Fingerprints are incontrovertible evidence in criminal cases.
            3. Bratkov Oleg
              Bratkov Oleg 2 February 2018 13: 08
              0
              But such a sky MUST see Amstrong in space:

              https://aircargonews.ru/uploads/posts/2017-12/151
              3505759_app-astronaute-1920x1080.jpg
          2. Bayonet
            Bayonet 21 December 2015 11: 32
            -6
            Quote: Artyom
            the funny thing is that the Americans cannot refute!

            And they need it, to listen to someone's nonsense and prove it to the ignoramus once again?
            1. noWAR
              noWAR 21 December 2015 12: 31
              +5
              Quote: Bayonet
              And they need it, to listen to someone's nonsense and prove it to the ignoramus once again?

              If you wouldn’t try to return the face to the Yerikos again!
              1. Bayonet
                Bayonet 22 December 2015 11: 00
                -4
                Quote: noWAR
                If you wouldn’t try to return the face to the Yerikos again!

                I don’t think that they lost it, after the publication of the next vyser of some small liar of the yellow operator! smile Read Mukhin at night and sleep peacefully! laughing
          3. Ezhaak
            Ezhaak 21 December 2015 12: 10
            -3
            Quote: Artyom
            Americans cannot refute

            Have you noticed that Russia failed to refute the charges of destroying a Malaysian plane? Idiocy is very difficult to refute.
            1. Bratkov Oleg
              Bratkov Oleg 2 February 2018 15: 32
              0
              Have you noticed that American athletes openly take doping according to the type of “medical testimony”, and the Russians have been suspended only because they are “Russian”?
              Everything is completely with the Malaysian Boeing, and it has been proven to the end that Ukraine was shot down, but this does not coincide with the US plans.
              And with the lunar scam, everything is also very clear, the USSR 11 years earlier than the United States launched the astronaut Gagarin into orbit, and the United States flew into space for the first time only in 1971, and such a lag terribly humiliating "country number one" as the United States positioned itself. Yes, they have good jeans, microcircuits are even better, but they learned to put large masses into orbit only after the help of the USSR, even the docking station on Apollo was Soviet. Higher people who must control other nations, and so humiliating, cannot launch an astronaut into space, have to deal with cinema ...
        2. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 21 December 2015 10: 52
          +2
          Quote: subbtin.725
          Plumbum has screwed up.

          fur... hi
      2. ohtsistem
        ohtsistem 21 December 2015 10: 58
        +6
        Who are you?
        They carved themselves - this is a classic without comment
    2. sssla
      sssla 21 December 2015 10: 55
      +9
      Quote: ohtsistem
      It’s necessary for so many years all the brains were powdering

      Not for everyone, but only for those who wanted more powder in their stupid!)))
    3. Loreal
      Loreal 21 December 2015 10: 56
      -7
      Rather, these masters of provocation lead you by the nose.
    4. Strezhevchanin
      Strezhevchanin 21 December 2015 11: 01
      +7
      Quote: ohtsistem
      It’s necessary for so many years that everyone’s brains were powdered ... no words

      This is not even the tip of the iceberg, it was something floating nearby)))
      Archives! We need the Billy archives!
      1. Loreal
        Loreal 21 December 2015 11: 45
        -8
        They may show them to you later, when you all jump up and get happy with fatigue. As well as again the camera from the Surveyor spacecraft which arrived with Apollo 13 (no 12) back with tons of lunar soil that was shown earlier. And you will all feel sad at once yes Even more sad than before ... To this and all these statements of Mr. Stanley. And from shame and complete immoral devastation you will no longer have the strength to resist their advanced propaganda in completely different areas and not in this
        1. noWAR
          noWAR 21 December 2015 12: 36
          +1
          Quote: Loreal
          They may show them to you later, when you all jump up and get happy with fatigue. As well as again the camera from the Surveyor spacecraft which arrived with Apollo 13 (no 12) back with tons of lunar soil that was shown earlier. And you will all feel sad at once yes Even more sad than before ... To this and all these statements of Mr. Stanley. And from shame and complete immoral devastation you will no longer have the strength to resist their advanced propaganda in completely different areas and not in this


          We're all living in Amerika Amerika ist wunderbar We're all living in Amerika Amerika, Amerika Wenn getanzt wird
          Do you work out the flag?
          1. Loreal
            Loreal 21 December 2015 16: 56
            0
            And this one will do?
  • saber
    saber 21 December 2015 10: 42
    29
    And where are the developments from that Saturn? why do "proud conquerors of the moon" fly on our engines?
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. gfs84
      gfs84 21 December 2015 11: 14
      +3
      And where are the developments from that Saturn? why do "proud conquerors of the moon" fly on our engines?


      Missions on Mars (both descent 3 Mars rovers + a stationary station, and orbital), a mission to the asteroid belt, to Saturn (Cassini) and Jupiter (Galileo), to Pluto and further to the cloud (New Horizons), to Mercury (Messenger). .. And this is without telescopes ...
      And in all of them Russia, if it participated in it, was a separate device ...
      But we don’t want to remember about ours (I mean the Russian Federation) since alas, there are no successful ones ... Fortunately, at least something is being obtained with observatories ...

      Be objective when exploring the deep space of NASO ahead of the rest of the planet, albeit not without the help of the whole planet.
      1. saber
        saber 21 December 2015 11: 48
        +2
        In what year flew to Mars ??? again, these are automatic stations. while there are discussions about the possibility of even surviving a person outside the field of the Earth
        1. gfs84
          gfs84 21 December 2015 12: 07
          +4
          In what year flew to Mars ??? again, these are automatic stations. while there are discussions about the possibility of even surviving a person outside the field of the Earth


          I answered the question about the developments.

          But if you are so interested, then the first reaching Mariner (4) started in 1964, the first satellite Mariner-9. we (the USSR) were the first to lower the probe to the surface, in 1971 (Mars-3). And for a long time working AMC Viking-1.
          The USSR had Venus in priority (and the planet is more interesting - then they hoped that there was life and conditions more difficult on the surface), and we have something to be proud of on that front. It was only after 1982 that we did not put anything else there (in 1985 there were satellites), and no one doubts our achievements, so where does such a bias in the Apollo program come from?
          About voyagers, I generally keep quiet, this is 1977, although they were able to achieve similar ranges only in 2007-2015, and again these "liars" Americans ...
          I especially "liked" the "explosion" of joy of individual individuals on this resource when information about the loss of connection with "new horizons" on the approach to Pluto passed ... Very worthy behavior you will not say anything ...
          We don’t know how to lose, therefore we pretend that nobody just won us ...
          1. Loreal
            Loreal 21 December 2015 12: 41
            -1
            Can you explain the meaning of the image flight of Voyagers who simply took photographs for the public?
            The world government, like any terrestrial inconvenience, gave the USSR the planet Venus because it is more complex and unpromising.
            1. gfs84
              gfs84 21 December 2015 13: 07
              +1
              Can you explain the meaning of the image flight of Voyagers who simply took photographs for the public?


              Well said, "image", but for some reason could not repeat to anyone, when the European agency was working on "Cassini" also turned to those who had the experience of this "Image flight" ...
              If you approach this way, then the first satellite and the first person and the first exit and the first flyby of the moon are all "Imperial" programs, just to show it we can, and we can be the first!
              To reach the boundaries of the heliosphere - you’ll think what nonsense, we do it every day in our dreams ...
              38 years of flight, also nonsense, our Phobos-soil flew for 6 whole days (until it burned out in dense layers of the atmosphere), but it was "more difficult" for him to work in the explored surroundings of the earth, and these were somewhere on the border of the system .. ...
              And you’ll think about the spectrometers there (ultraviolet and infrared), but who needs any plasma detectors or charged particles, especially lower energies ...
              about such antiquity as cameras in general I am silent the more so they broke ...
              Why do we need all this knowledge? We are in the old fashioned way, as in the days of Sergey Pavlovich, when constructing lunar rovers, we will take voluntary decisions to accept that the surface of the Moon is solid (and it was so, the data were catastrophically lacking) ...
              World government??? Who is this? Darth Vader is at the head ???
              Yes, it was GIVEN (just the same forcibly) to the mercy of the USSR (and there everyone took it under a visor) ... Then yes ... No words ...
              I especially like the unpromising ... at that time without the data of those very notorious "Venus" ...
              1. Loreal
                Loreal 21 December 2015 16: 35
                0
                Because really "image". The planets rarely stand so that they can fly around without entering orbit each of them all at once. While the authorities were running around and agreeing to prove the necessity - time had passed ... For some reason, the Americans separately sent a flyby probe to the last planet much later (and on Soviet engines). Instances then went on a tour to the USA again.
                From the Soviet image was only flying around with a photo of the far side of the moon, the rest is much more serious.
                Are you looking for new elements of the periodic table with these plasma detectors? The boundary of the heliosphere is mobile. lol
                Fools even understand through the telescope from the Earth that the Moon is solid and round, and Venus close to the Sun, with its powerful atmosphere still open by Lomonosov, is hotter than the Earth or Mars.
                Quote: gfs84
                World government??? Who is this? Darth Vader is at the head ???

                How long have you been admitted to the Masons?
          2. Extraneous
            Extraneous 21 December 2015 12: 51
            +2
            : o) No one knows how to lose. From not skills and lose.
          3. saber
            saber 21 December 2015 15: 55
            +1
            Listen, we had an impressive experience creating space stations! but on this basis it cannot be argued that a manned flight to Mars is within our power!
      2. Loreal
        Loreal 21 December 2015 12: 37
        0
        NASA did not land on Venus. The Cassini probe is an ESA, with the participation of NASA.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. gfs84
          gfs84 21 December 2015 13: 16
          -1
          so I didn’t say that NASA landed on Venus ...
          I said that I am very proud of the achievements under the Venus program ...
          That's just the continuation in the near future is not expected (so in 10 years) ...
          The Italians have been forgotten ... In the Cassini-Huygens mission ...
          I talked about Cassini, and this is first of all NASA, ESA is Huygens, Well, the radar from Italians (the power supply is by the way our domestic) ...
          Derived by Titan-4, without any RD ...
          1. Loreal
            Loreal 21 December 2015 16: 46
            0
            Italians are Europe. Almost all of Cassini is European. Why not F-1?
            1. Bayonet
              Bayonet 22 December 2015 11: 05
              -1
              Quote: Loreal
              Why not F-1?

              "Why isn't Saturn 5?" Got it?
              1. Loreal
                Loreal 22 December 2015 18: 01
                0
                F-1 can not be put on another launch vehicle? Did it come to or help with this?
      3. Bratkov Oleg
        Bratkov Oleg 24 August 2017 14: 28
        0
        The heaviest Mars rover was delivered to Mars by a Russian engine, and on it a Russian nuclear power source, not counting the device for detecting water in the depths of the soil.

        The first Russians “landed” on Venus, and so did Mars. This is history.
      4. Bratkov Oleg
        Bratkov Oleg 2 February 2018 15: 48
        0
        Americans on the moon is 100 percent crap. They did not fly into space at all 11 years after the flight of Gagarin, and they, as a "higher race", were painfully ashamed. The USSR flies into space, and the Americans only in words, it turns out, are the best. Here's a photo of what space really looks like, and not “a black sky without a single star,” according to Amstrong.
        Personally, I became interested in flying to the moon after Amstrong claimed that there was a black sky, although every Soviet schoolchild knows that in space, in airless space, stars are visible everywhere and always, even near the Sun. Further, Amstrong allegedly flew to Jameny, and right in front of his lying American mug, the whole flight had a porthole ... And he did not see the stars, did not even know how they looked. And they look there so that you can not look at them, but it is impossible not to notice them. And don’t be stupid, the filter on the helmet, which will not let you see the stars, will not let you see anything else, it's like putting a black bag on. The brightness of stars is several times higher than the reflected light from the moon and from the earth.
        And in Yemen, the head of the astronaut is at the very bottom, at 5 for 5 minutes - such overloads when entering orbit, the astronaut will inevitably die from hemorrhage in the brain, or at least due to a violation of the blood supply to the brain.
        Do not be stupid, learn to use technical literature. )))
        https://aircargonews.ru/uploads/posts/2017-12/151
        3505759_app-astronaute-1920x1080.jpg
    3. Vadim237
      Vadim237 21 December 2015 12: 58
      +2
      Developments from Saturn, namely from the F 1 engine, are now used in the advanced RS 25 engine for SLS missiles, the United States buys engines for one type of missile from us, and the United States has a lot of different types of missiles and has its own engines there.
  • Snake AAA
    Snake AAA 21 December 2015 10: 43
    19
    The Americans always knew how to make a good movie, and if they were really on the moon, why didn’t they fly again? We are talking about the exploration of the moon and things are still there, and there is no need to say that there is no money!
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 21 December 2015 10: 51
    23
    Yes they flew. Saturn V is a very large rocket, and launched grandly. And, perhaps, even around the moon. But their module did not sit down. Upon their return, they burned this module in dense layers of the atmosphere. And where are the samples of the lunar soil that they brought in large quantities? Stole them!
    1. sssla
      sssla 21 December 2015 11: 00
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Yes they flew. Saturn V is a very large rocket, and launched grandly. And, perhaps, even around the moon. But their module did not sit down.

      This is most likely 99.99% And you say that all the same 0.01% is there and they landed on Moon ?? No, this hundredth percent refers to the probability that the mattresses are honest in this matter !!!
      1. Locksmith
        Locksmith 21 December 2015 11: 20
        +4
        Quote: sssla
        No, this hundredth percent refers to the probability that the mattresses are honest in this matter !!!

        Call a neighbor in a neighboring neighborhood, let him leave by car now and meet you at the corner of some street, and very accurately touch your car, which goes at a speed of 120 km / h, then let it climb in