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.
843 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    21 December 2015 10: 31
    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. +41
      21 December 2015 10: 34
      Who needs such stuffing?
      1. +201
        21 December 2015 10: 42
        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. +67
          21 December 2015 10: 50
          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. +3
            21 December 2015 10: 55
            If Stanley Kubrick filmed something this walk on the moon still does not cancel.
            1. +24
              21 December 2015 11: 14
              Quote: Loreal
              If Stanley Kubrick filmed something this walk on the moon still does not cancel.

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

                  1. +2
                    21 December 2015 12: 13
                    Watch from the 23rd second laughing
                    1. GDP
                      +186
                      21 December 2015 12: 33
                      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. +104
                        21 December 2015 13: 03
                        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
                        +129
                        21 December 2015 13: 14
                        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. +19
                        21 December 2015 14: 25
                        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. +43
                        21 December 2015 19: 59
                        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. +21
                        22 December 2015 12: 01
                        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. -24
                        22 December 2015 13: 48
                        Pffff, stupid
                      8. GDP
                        +21
                        22 December 2015 16: 12
                        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. +4
                        23 December 2015 10: 20
                        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
                        +6
                        24 December 2015 11: 25
                        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.
                      11. +1
                        22 December 2015 17: 00
                        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!
                      12. +14
                        22 December 2015 19: 00
                        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.
                      13. 0
                        23 December 2015 16: 54
                        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.
                      14. +7
                        23 December 2015 20: 03
                        Wahahaha! Judging by your logic, then we are buying up foreign cars and chirp so that the unfortunate bourgeois walked on foot and naked))))
                      15. +5
                        22 December 2015 22: 03
                        Damn, but McCain doesn’t know ...
                      16. +18
                        23 December 2015 01: 53
                        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.
                      17. The comment was deleted.
                      18. +8
                        21 December 2015 23: 21
                        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.
                      19. 0
                        5 January 2019 20: 17
                        + to all, when shooting, the film would light up and there would be no pictures at all
                      20. +1
                        28 March 2020 04: 33
                        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.
                      21. +23
                        21 December 2015 15: 02
                        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.
                      22. +15
                        21 December 2015 16: 50
                        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.
                      23. +17
                        21 December 2015 18: 39
                        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.
                      24. +6
                        21 December 2015 23: 58
                        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
                      25. GDP
                        +10
                        22 December 2015 16: 50
                        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 ????
                      26. +1
                        24 December 2015 10: 27
                        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.
                      27. +11
                        23 December 2015 02: 28
                        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?
                      28. 0
                        21 December 2015 23: 51
                        Quote: andj61
                        There, only radiation belts are mentioned - and that’s it.

                        Well, I went too slightly ...
                        request


                      29. +6
                        21 December 2015 22: 54
                        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.
                      30. +1
                        22 December 2015 00: 22
                        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
                      31. +19
                        21 December 2015 23: 28
                        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.
                      32. +4
                        22 December 2015 00: 29
                        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
                      33. GDP
                        +10
                        22 December 2015 16: 32
                        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 ....
                      34. +5
                        22 December 2015 16: 51
                        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
                      35. -8
                        22 December 2015 17: 23
                        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




                      36. -3
                        22 December 2015 17: 29
                        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




                      37. +9
                        22 December 2015 18: 12
                        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.
                      38. -3
                        23 December 2015 00: 03
                        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
                      39. +4
                        23 December 2015 02: 34
                        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.
                      40. +11
                        22 December 2015 19: 16
                        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
                      41. -2
                        23 December 2015 00: 13
                        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:
                        July 16, 1969 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"?
                      42. +5
                        23 December 2015 06: 05
                        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.
                      43. -2
                        23 December 2015 19: 04
                        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.



                      44. +2
                        23 December 2015 20: 48
                        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.
                      45. -2
                        23 December 2015 23: 16
                        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
                      46. 0
                        13 January 2019 11: 48
                        The mass of the satellite was not 100 g, but 83,6 kg!
                      47. RDX
                        +3
                        22 December 2015 17: 11
                        But how then are they going to organize a flight to Mars? how are they now protected from radiation?
                      48. -4
                        22 December 2015 17: 35
                        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).
                      49. +3
                        22 December 2015 19: 20
                        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?
                      50. +2
                        23 December 2015 01: 41
                        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 ?
                      51. +4
                        23 December 2015 06: 07
                        Read above. After Stalin, all our leaders were opportunists - the thaw, detente, perestroika ... They were in the share with the Americans.
                      52. +2
                        23 December 2015 21: 30
                        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
                      53. 0
                        21 December 2015 14: 34
                        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!
                      54. -1
                        21 December 2015 14: 44
                        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
                      55. +9
                        21 December 2015 17: 09
                        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!
                      56. +23
                        21 December 2015 18: 49
                        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.

                      57. +2
                        21 December 2015 20: 03
                        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 ...
                      58. -8
                        22 December 2015 00: 18
                        And if the Americans were mutually compromising, for example, about the first flight into space?
                      59. +2
                        22 December 2015 07: 25
                        Ugum, that is, Gagarin did not fly into space?
                        Old song, not interesting ...
                      60. +7
                        22 December 2015 07: 12
                        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))
                      61. +4
                        23 December 2015 20: 03
                        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 ...
                      62. 0
                        22 December 2015 00: 16
                        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.
                      63. -3
                        22 December 2015 01: 23
                        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?
                      64. +5
                        22 December 2015 10: 57
                        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?
                      65. +2
                        21 December 2015 22: 58
                        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 ....
                      66. -7
                        22 December 2015 00: 38
                        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):


                      67. +3
                        22 December 2015 09: 38
                        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.
                      68. +5
                        22 December 2015 20: 10
                        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.
                      69. +2
                        23 December 2015 00: 11
                        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.
                      70. +1
                        23 December 2015 00: 11
                        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.
                      71. +1
                        23 December 2015 00: 22
                        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.
                      72. +19
                        21 December 2015 15: 33
                        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
                      73. +14
                        21 December 2015 16: 02
                        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.
                      74. +3
                        21 December 2015 16: 22
                        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?
                      75. +1
                        21 December 2015 17: 08
                        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:
                      76. +5
                        21 December 2015 18: 15
                        There is nothing surprising in comparison. Our module was designed for 1 person.
                      77. -4
                        21 December 2015 18: 32
                        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.
                      78. +3
                        22 December 2015 03: 29
                        Quote: opus
                        And so: everything converges and is comparable.

                        What converges and what is comparable?
                        The devil is in the details, if Che.
                      79. 0
                        25 December 2015 16: 29
                        Our still was not engaged in braking to enter the lunar orbit
                      80. +5
                        21 December 2015 20: 18
                        Quote: opus
                        Comparison with the Americans:

                        I'm not talking about size, about appearance
                      81. -3
                        22 December 2015 00: 44
                        Quote: Lukich
                        I'm not talking about size, about appearance

                        And is it important?
                        Rocket launchers they are also similar
                      82. +11
                        21 December 2015 16: 42
                        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
                      83. -3
                        21 December 2015 17: 12
                        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).

                      84. +5
                        21 December 2015 17: 27
                        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 ...
                      85. +3
                        21 December 2015 17: 47
                        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.
                      86. +10
                        21 December 2015 16: 54
                        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.
                      87. -2
                        21 December 2015 18: 42
                        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
                      88. +8
                        21 December 2015 19: 57
                        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
                      89. +1
                        21 December 2015 20: 56
                        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).
                      90. +6
                        21 December 2015 22: 12
                        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.
                      91. +3
                        22 December 2015 20: 58
                        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.
                      92. +7
                        22 December 2015 00: 54
                        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!
                      93. -6
                        22 December 2015 01: 31
                        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

                      94. +3
                        22 December 2015 02: 07
                        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.
                      95. -4
                        22 December 2015 12: 44
                        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
                      96. +3
                        22 December 2015 17: 29
                        ham is a chelovek who is rude. You are a boor.
                      97. +3
                        23 December 2015 00: 33
                        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!
                      98. +1
                        23 December 2015 00: 33
                        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!
                      99. +5
                        22 December 2015 20: 48
                        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.
                      100. +3
                        22 December 2015 20: 42
                        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.
                      101. +4
                        21 December 2015 23: 44
                        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.
                      102. -5
                        22 December 2015 00: 49
                        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
                      103. +4
                        22 December 2015 21: 00
                        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.
                      104. +2
                        23 December 2015 00: 06
                        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.
                      105. +3
                        22 December 2015 20: 25
                        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.
                      106. The comment was deleted.
                      107. 0
                        21 December 2015 17: 02
                        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.
                      108. +4
                        21 December 2015 23: 52
                        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.
                      109. -2
                        22 December 2015 01: 05
                        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
                      110. +2
                        22 December 2015 01: 07
                        “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.
                      111. +3
                        22 December 2015 21: 02
                        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.
                      112. +4
                        23 December 2015 00: 09
                        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.
                      113. +2
                        21 December 2015 16: 49
                        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:
                      114. 0
                        21 December 2015 16: 54
                        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
                      115. +7
                        21 December 2015 17: 07
                        Thank you very much for the answers and clarifications! hi
                      116. +3
                        22 December 2015 21: 05
                        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.
                      117. +3
                        21 December 2015 19: 22
                        Thanks for the information - convincingly, accurately, competently! good hi
                      118. +2
                        24 December 2015 01: 27
                        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.
                      119. +1
                        22 December 2015 09: 41
                        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.
                      120. +3
                        21 December 2015 17: 00
                        RS-25 c RD-170 can not be compared, they do not have such engines. The F-1 was very shaky and unreliable.
                      121. -2
                        21 December 2015 20: 40
                        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
                        ?
                      122. +2
                        22 December 2015 10: 51
                        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?
                      123. -1
                        22 December 2015 14: 47
                        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
                      124. +2
                        22 December 2015 17: 30
                        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.
                      125. +6
                        22 December 2015 21: 06
                        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.
                      126. 0
                        25 December 2015 12: 41
                        Maybe he’s just curious to teach the ungrateful?
                      127. +5
                        21 December 2015 20: 57
                        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 Dead end.
                        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.
                      128. 0
                        21 December 2015 21: 35
                        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

                        ?


                      129. -2
                        21 December 2015 21: 40
                        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.
                      130. -2
                        22 December 2015 10: 04
                        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.
                      131. +4
                        22 December 2015 11: 58
                        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.
                      132. +4
                        22 December 2015 21: 09
                        Naturally a myth.
                      133. +3
                        23 December 2015 09: 02
                        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?
                      134. +2
                        21 December 2015 15: 53
                        . 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?)
                      135. +1
                        22 December 2015 21: 10
                        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.
                      136. -1
                        21 December 2015 16: 42
                        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.
                      137. +2
                        22 December 2015 21: 11
                        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.
                      138. +2
                        21 December 2015 16: 55
                        They were very dumb and are not used. About the rest they kind of answered.
                      139. 0
                        21 December 2015 17: 04
                        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?
                      140. +2
                        21 December 2015 21: 27
                        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.
                      141. 0
                        21 December 2015 22: 07
                        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.
                      142. +5
                        21 December 2015 22: 33
                        . 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.
                      143. +4
                        21 December 2015 23: 10
                        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.
                      144. +1
                        22 December 2015 13: 51
                        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 ...
                      145. +3
                        22 December 2015 15: 18
                        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/
                      146. +1
                        23 December 2015 01: 32
                        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?
                    2. +4
                      21 December 2015 23: 04
                      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.
                  2. +4
                    21 December 2015 12: 27
                    This is Luntik !!! Look at the ears)))
                  3. 0
                    22 December 2015 05: 48
                    But Luntik is not so harmless ...)))
                2. +2
                  21 December 2015 16: 32
                  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. 0
                    22 December 2015 00: 05
                    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. 0
                      25 December 2015 15: 17
                      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. 0
                        25 December 2015 15: 52
                        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. +1
                    22 December 2015 19: 14
                    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. 0
                    25 December 2015 11: 39
                    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.
                3. +5
                  21 December 2015 17: 55
                  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. -2
                    21 December 2015 22: 13
                    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. +1
                    22 December 2015 00: 08
                    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.
                4. +3
                  21 December 2015 19: 55
                  pride suffers among Americans
                5. 0
                  4 May 2018 11: 58
                  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.
              2. +4
                21 December 2015 19: 48
                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. +1
                  22 December 2015 00: 11
                  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. 0
                    4 May 2018 12: 05
                    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 ...
            2. +28
              21 December 2015 11: 30
              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. +9
                21 December 2015 11: 42
                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. +6
                  21 December 2015 12: 37
                  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. +1
                  21 December 2015 17: 11
                  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. +9
                21 December 2015 11: 45
                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. +6
                21 December 2015 14: 58
                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, let me remind you, 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. -1
                  21 December 2015 17: 18
                  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. +4
                    21 December 2015 18: 24
                    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. +2
                      21 December 2015 19: 21
                      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. 0
                        21 December 2015 19: 59
                        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. 0
                      21 December 2015 19: 29
                      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. +5
                        21 December 2015 19: 50
                        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. 0
                        21 December 2015 22: 28
                        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.
                    3. +2
                      22 December 2015 11: 52
                      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. -2
                        22 December 2015 13: 13
                        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. +1
                        22 December 2015 13: 14
                        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. -1
                        22 December 2015 17: 26
                        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
                      4. 0
                        22 December 2015 17: 20
                        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
                      5. +1
                        22 December 2015 21: 19
                        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-
              4. -1
                21 December 2015 17: 17
                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
              5. +1
                22 December 2015 21: 13
                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. +2
              21 December 2015 11: 42
              Quote: Loreal
              If Stanley Kubrick filmed something

              something too much he shot
              1. 0
                21 December 2015 12: 11
                But why not strain too much? Serious uncles looked at the chronicle, and you watch it.
            4. +9
              21 December 2015 11: 42
              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. +14
                21 December 2015 12: 01
                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. +4
                  21 December 2015 13: 08
                  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. -1
                    22 December 2015 01: 57
                    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. +2
                      22 December 2015 21: 22
                      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. +1
                  21 December 2015 19: 04
                  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. +1
                  21 December 2015 23: 51
                  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. 0
                  22 December 2015 00: 22
                  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. 0
                21 December 2015 12: 48
                Already confirmed by high-resolution photos - they are real /www.nasa.gov/image-feature/nov-19-1969-apollo-12-lunar-module-intrepid
                1. +7
                  21 December 2015 13: 55
                  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. +1
                    21 December 2015 14: 22
                    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. +10
                      21 December 2015 14: 48
                      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. +3
                        21 December 2015 19: 08
                        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. +2
                        21 December 2015 20: 57
                        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. 0
                        22 December 2015 05: 14
                        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. +5
                      21 December 2015 15: 21
                      Maybe the film is somehow frost-free, who knows, but radiation should have spoiled the image thoroughly.
                  2. +2
                    21 December 2015 19: 02
                    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. -1
                      22 December 2015 00: 29
                      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. -2
                        22 December 2015 13: 45
                        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. -1
                        22 December 2015 14: 33
                        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. +3
                        22 December 2015 21: 30
                        And they did everything dressed in diapers! Ay, how uncomfortable for the Americans. Therefore, they declared the protected area of ​​their landings!
                  3. +3
                    21 December 2015 20: 50
                    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
                  4. 0
                    22 December 2015 00: 25
                    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. +1
                      22 December 2015 00: 38
                      They would be baked without atmosphere (like their gravitsapu) under direct sunlight.
                2. +6
                  21 December 2015 14: 29
                  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. +2
                    21 December 2015 16: 40
                    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. +3
                      22 December 2015 00: 30
                      how then could they stick it if it is spring loaded laughing
                    2. +2
                      22 December 2015 21: 32
                      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.
                3. 0
                  22 December 2015 21: 23
                  Um, uh, they're real!
            5. +5
              21 December 2015 12: 21
              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. -1
                21 December 2015 16: 36
                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
            6. +16
              21 December 2015 13: 10
              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. -3
                21 December 2015 16: 51
                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. 0
                  22 December 2015 19: 23
                  These modules have a weight of two to three times less than those displayed by Protons
            7. +1
              21 December 2015 19: 52
              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. +1
                22 December 2015 21: 33
                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. 0
                  24 December 2015 12: 43
                  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.
            8. +2
              21 December 2015 23: 38
              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.
            9. +3
              22 December 2015 01: 45
              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
            10. +1
              22 December 2015 08: 08
              Even if it wasn’t, then it WAS?
            11. +2
              22 December 2015 18: 47
              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.
            12. 0
              21 December 2017 10: 00
              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.
          2. -16
            21 December 2015 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.

            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. +37
              21 December 2015 11: 02
              Yeah, as soon as we see a photo as a proof of these words, we will immediately stop speculating
              1. -10
                21 December 2015 11: 28
                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. +6
                  21 December 2015 11: 41
                  LINK THROW
                  1. -3
                    21 December 2015 12: 33
                    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. +1
                      21 December 2015 13: 13
                      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. -2
                      21 December 2015 16: 12
                      Quote: Bayonet
                      a lot of material

                      Thank you buddy! good
                  2. +2
                    21 December 2015 13: 43
                    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. +6
                      21 December 2015 13: 57
                      where are the footprints? point blank I do not see!
                      1. +3
                        21 December 2015 14: 34
                        ..........
                      2. -8
                        21 December 2015 16: 54
                        Quote: valent45
                        where are the footprints? point blank I do not see!

                        Can't see or don't want to see? smile
                    2. +2
                      21 December 2015 16: 45
                      Nikuya is not visible!
                      1. 0
                        22 December 2015 21: 39
                        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. +9
                      21 December 2015 17: 37
                      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. +18
                  21 December 2015 11: 44
                  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. +7
                    21 December 2015 11: 53
                    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. +1
                      21 December 2015 12: 10
                      Very interesting material, thanks for the link.
                    2. +12
                      21 December 2015 12: 48
                      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. -7
                        21 December 2015 13: 33
                        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. +5
                        21 December 2015 14: 14
                        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. +2
                        22 December 2015 21: 43
                        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. -1
                      21 December 2015 12: 51
                      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. +4
                        21 December 2015 13: 20
                        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. +3
                        21 December 2015 16: 22
                        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.
                    4. +6
                      21 December 2015 12: 58
                      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. +5
                        21 December 2015 13: 15
                        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. -3
                        21 December 2015 13: 39
                        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. +3
                        21 December 2015 13: 52
                        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. -7
                        21 December 2015 15: 23
                        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. +9
                        21 December 2015 16: 40
                        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. +5
                        21 December 2015 17: 46
                        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. +1
                        22 December 2015 21: 47
                        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.
                      8. +1
                        22 December 2015 21: 46
                        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.
                    5. +10
                      21 December 2015 13: 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. +4
                        21 December 2015 16: 17
                        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
                    6. The comment was deleted.
                      1. The comment was deleted.
                      2. +2
                        21 December 2015 13: 24
                        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. +5
                        21 December 2015 13: 35
                        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. +1
                        21 December 2015 13: 48
                        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. +6
                        21 December 2015 14: 54
                        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. +12
                        21 December 2015 16: 10
                        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. -6
                        21 December 2015 18: 00
                        [quote = Temples] It's just ridiculous how many people puff out their cheeks and snot from their nose bubble on this subject. [/ quote
                        hi
                      8. +2
                        22 December 2015 21: 49
                        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.
                    7. +4
                      21 December 2015 19: 16
                      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. +2
                        22 December 2015 21: 51
                        Bravo. My thoughts Leonov right man, ordered to say so, but now there is no one to withdraw the order.
                    8. 0
                      22 December 2015 21: 41
                      The famous Soviet cosmonaut A. Leonov honestly fulfills his obligations to the CPSU - not to reveal the truth.
                3. The comment was deleted.
                4. +5
                  21 December 2015 16: 10
                  Quote: Bayonet
                  Well, crawl on the Internet, or laziness? There are photos from satellites!

                  You * climbed *? Show. hi
              2. +4
                21 December 2015 12: 29
                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. -2
                  22 December 2015 10: 01
                  Quote: Simon
                  Photo can be faked

                  And clone you! Only benefit from this no! hi
            2. +12
              21 December 2015 11: 34
              _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"?
            3. The comment was deleted.
            4. +4
              21 December 2015 11: 38
              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. +7
                21 December 2015 11: 43
                Physics fluttered the flag. This question has long been chewed and digested.
                1. -1
                  22 December 2015 21: 54
                  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. +2
                21 December 2015 11: 49
                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. +2
                21 December 2015 12: 31
                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. +4
                  21 December 2015 18: 00
                  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. +7
                    21 December 2015 20: 09
                    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. +3
                    21 December 2015 23: 57
                    Well, they themselves said that they reshooted the landing, because the negligent employee erased everything)))
            5. +2
              21 December 2015 12: 24
              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?)
            6. -1
              21 December 2015 12: 26
              It all comes down to money. The flight of astronauts to the moon is very expensive.
              1. 0
                21 December 2017 12: 46
                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.
            7. +3
              21 December 2015 12: 56
              And bruce ivanych willis also saved the planet from armagendon
            8. 0
              21 December 2015 13: 09
              Where is that said?
            9. 0
              21 December 2015 16: 20
              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. 0
                21 December 2017 12: 51
                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.
            10. +1
              22 December 2015 21: 38
              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.
            11. 0
              21 December 2017 10: 07
              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!
          3. +3
            21 December 2015 11: 39
            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 ...
          4. +5
            21 December 2015 12: 51
            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. 0
              21 December 2017 12: 32
              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.
          5. +1
            21 December 2015 21: 20
            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. +1
              22 December 2015 21: 57
              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.
          6. 0
            22 December 2015 13: 48
            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. +1
              22 December 2015 22: 01
              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. 0
                23 December 2015 01: 45
                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. +2
                  23 December 2015 06: 39
                  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. 0
                    23 December 2015 18: 31
                    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. 0
                      23 December 2015 18: 32
                      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. +1
              22 December 2015 22: 11
              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. 0
                23 December 2015 01: 59
                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 gr. 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. 0
                  23 December 2015 02: 06
                  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. -2
                    23 December 2015 02: 45
                    In terms of tenacity, you still have to compete.
                    Merged - say so. No tantrums.
                    1. 0
                      23 December 2015 18: 35
                      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. +1
                  23 December 2015 02: 44
                  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. 0
                    23 December 2015 18: 46
                    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. 0
                      24 August 2017 18: 46
                      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. 0
              21 December 2017 12: 41
              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.
        2. +31
          21 December 2015 10: 52
          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. +2
            21 December 2015 11: 18
            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. 0
              24 August 2017 18: 53
              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. 0
                21 December 2017 07: 54
                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.
        3. +10
          21 December 2015 11: 05
          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 ...
        4. +8
          21 December 2015 11: 26
          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. +4
            21 December 2015 18: 27
            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. -5
              21 December 2015 18: 34
              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. +4
                21 December 2015 20: 10
                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.
        5. +4
          21 December 2015 11: 30
          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. +2
            22 December 2015 10: 50
            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
        6. +6
          21 December 2015 11: 46
          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. +5
            21 December 2015 11: 57
            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. +1
              22 December 2015 10: 52
              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. +3
                23 December 2015 03: 01
                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 ...
        7. -4
          21 December 2015 12: 02
          These are not stuffing, but emissions of what actually happened.
        8. +7
          21 December 2015 12: 39
          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. -2
            21 December 2015 16: 46
            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 ...
        9. -3
          21 December 2015 13: 39
          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. +2
            23 December 2015 05: 40
            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.
        10. +3
          21 December 2015 20: 11
          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.
        11. -1
          21 December 2015 23: 28
          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.
        12. -3
          22 December 2015 10: 39
          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!
        13. 0
          23 December 2015 19: 57

          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
        14. 0
          23 August 2017 17: 41
          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
        15. 0
          12 October 2018 14: 59
          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.
      2. -4
        21 December 2015 11: 00
        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.
      3. WKS
        +13
        21 December 2015 11: 40
        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.
      4. 0
        21 December 2015 11: 55
        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
      5. -6
        21 December 2015 12: 21
        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
      6. +6
        21 December 2015 13: 43
        A similar problem with the "Gemini" ... September 11
      7. +2
        21 December 2015 13: 55
        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.
      8. 0
        21 December 2015 22: 55
        I think fools
      9. 0
        23 December 2015 18: 54
        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. 0
          6 September 2017 11: 35
          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.
      10. +1
        24 August 2017 14: 22
        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
      11. 0
        28 August 2017 21: 54
        ))) 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. 0
          6 September 2017 11: 55
          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.
      12. 0
        6 September 2017 11: 18
        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.
      13. 0
        2 February 2018 13: 07
        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
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. +13
      21 December 2015 10: 34
      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. +8
        21 December 2015 10: 36
        Quote: ohtsistem
        mattresses brought to clean water

        Who are you?
        1. 0
          21 December 2015 10: 37
          Plumbum has screwed up.
          1. +29
            21 December 2015 10: 48
            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. +26
              21 December 2015 11: 03
              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. +1
                21 December 2015 11: 56
                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
                +2
                21 December 2015 16: 11
                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. 0
                2 February 2018 13: 08
                But such a sky MUST see Amstrong in space:

                https://aircargonews.ru/uploads/posts/2017-12/151
                3505759_app-astronaute-1920x1080.jpg
            2. -6
              21 December 2015 11: 32
              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. +5
                21 December 2015 12: 31
                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. -4
                  22 December 2015 11: 00
                  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. -3
              21 December 2015 12: 10
              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. 0
                2 February 2018 15: 32
                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. +2
            21 December 2015 10: 52
            Quote: subbtin.725
            Plumbum has screwed up.

            fur... hi
        2. +6
          21 December 2015 10: 58
          Who are you?
          They carved themselves - this is a classic without comment
      2. +9
        21 December 2015 10: 55
        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. -7
        21 December 2015 10: 56
        Rather, these masters of provocation lead you by the nose.
      4. +7
        21 December 2015 11: 01
        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. -8
          21 December 2015 11: 45
          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. +1
            21 December 2015 12: 36
            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. 0
              21 December 2015 16: 56
              And this one will do?
    4. +29
      21 December 2015 10: 42
      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. +3
        21 December 2015 11: 14
        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. +2
          21 December 2015 11: 48
          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. +4
            21 December 2015 12: 07
            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. -1
              21 December 2015 12: 41
              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. +1
                21 December 2015 13: 07
                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. 0
                  21 December 2015 16: 35
                  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. +2
              21 December 2015 12: 51
              : o) No one knows how to lose. From not skills and lose.
            3. +1
              21 December 2015 15: 55
              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. 0
          21 December 2015 12: 37
          NASA did not land on Venus. The Cassini probe is an ESA, with the participation of NASA.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. -1
            21 December 2015 13: 16
            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. 0
              21 December 2015 16: 46
              Italians are Europe. Almost all of Cassini is European. Why not F-1?
              1. -1
                22 December 2015 11: 05
                Quote: Loreal
                Why not F-1?

                "Why isn't Saturn 5?" Got it?
                1. 0
                  22 December 2015 18: 01
                  F-1 can not be put on another launch vehicle? Did it come to or help with this?
        3. 0
          24 August 2017 14: 28
          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. 0
          2 February 2018 15: 48
          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. +2
        21 December 2015 12: 58
        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.
    5. +19
      21 December 2015 10: 43
      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!
    6. The comment was deleted.
    7. +23
      21 December 2015 10: 51
      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. +3
        21 December 2015 11: 00
        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. +4
          21 December 2015 11: 20
          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 into your car wassat -This bad allegory just characterizes the landing of the Americans on the moon, only they did it in airless space and controlled missiles, and they did not have any attempts to train, they failed all ground tests. wink
      2. 0
        21 December 2015 11: 36
        I wonder if there are observatories with powerful telescopes that observed the landing on the moon? and where is their star-striped flag, what kind of module remained at the landing site? footprints on the landing site, which should remain for centuries?
        1. 0
          2 February 2018 16: 05
          Amstrong did not see stars in space, but should have seen this:
          https://aircargonews.ru/uploads/posts/2017-12/151
          3505759_app-astronaute-1920x1080.jpg
          Between ... 151 and 350 ... remove the space!
          The frame is rare, not censored for some reason by the Americans.
      3. +1
        21 December 2015 11: 37
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        Upon return, they burned this module in dense atmospheric layers.

        After undocking by Apollo, the lander left orbit and fell on the lunar surface. You at least inquired about the lunar program before issuing such pearls! smile
      4. +3
        21 December 2015 12: 02
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        Yes they flew. Saturn V is a very large rocket, and launched grandly. And, perhaps, even around the moon.
        stupidly from WIKI: I can’t vouch for reliability, of course, but the information is interesting to think about ...
        RD-170 is a liquid-propellant rocket engine developed by KB Energomash (the beginning of work in 1976). It is the most powerful liquid-propellant rocket engine ever created. It is 2,1-5,65% more powerful than the single-chamber F-1 engine, installed on the first stage of the Saturn-5 LV, with dimensions smaller by 1,5 times.
        1. 0
          22 December 2015 11: 16
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          stupidly from WIKI: I can’t vouch for reliability, of course, but the information is interesting to think about ...
          RD-170 is a liquid-propellant rocket engine developed by KB Energomash (the beginning of work in 1976). It is the most powerful liquid-propellant rocket engine ever created.

          "Before (before its creation!) The creation of the RD-1 liquid-propellant rocket engine (with a thrust of 170 tf), the F-740 was the most powerful rocket engine in flight. To this day, it remains the second most powerful liquid rocket engine and the most powerful single-chamber rocket engine that actually flew. -170 - four-chamber!
          Oversized
          Features
          Weight: 9 (dry - 115) kg
          Height: 5,79 m
          Diameter: 3,76 m
          Performance Characteristics
          Thrust: Vacuum: 790 tf (7,77 MN)
          Level of the sea: 690 tf (6.77 MN)
          1. +1
            24 August 2017 14: 35
            But there is not a single fact, except for the fables concocted by the Americans, about the use of the F-1.
            It would not be difficult for a technically competent person to look at the design of the Gemeni spacecraft, on which the Americans supposedly flew into space before the flight to the Moon, and Amstrong also flew to Gemeni once. Square hatches open outwards on piano loops. astronauts are sitting incorrectly, when the rocket takes off, and when landing - the head is at the very bottom, for several minutes with an overload of 5 ... 6 - and guaranteed troupe. They could not fly such shit into space !!!
            Be technically literate, use your mind!
      5. 0
        23 December 2015 06: 51
        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.
        1. 0
          24 August 2017 14: 37
          There are HOW astronauts sit. The seat position is for an airplane, but not for a spaceship. With such a landing during take-off and landing, the head is at the lowest point, 5 ... 6 within a few minutes ... Gee.
    8. +11
      21 December 2015 10: 51
      Quote: Engineer
      ... As an engineer, I will tell you that systems such as, say, Abakus were developed and used for the design and calculation of this project. And now the whole world uses ... Soviet-made engines to get to the ISS ... yeah ...! yes where did the technologies go, that the "lunar program" is being developed again? but here's where:
      1. +2
        21 December 2015 10: 59
        Video is nothing (minus is not mine).
        1. +4
          21 December 2015 12: 04
          Quote: Horst78
          Video is nothing (minus is not mine).

          minus about anything, the video is not mine! lol
      2. -3
        21 December 2015 11: 41
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        . I’ll tell you as an engineer

        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        And now the whole world uses ... Soviet-made engines to get to the ISS.

        Well, if you are such a knowledgeable engineer, tell me - how many times did the Shuttles fly to the ISS, how many cargo ships and which countries flew to the ISS? And on whose engines is all this? smile
        1. +6
          21 December 2015 12: 06
          Quote: Bayonet
          And on whose engines is all this?

          request I have no idea ... honestly. so, is degradation evident? did, flew and forgot how to do it? what
          1. -2
            21 December 2015 13: 28
            Quote: Andrey Yurievich
            did, flew and forgot how to do it?

            If you represent an organization of complex production (and rocket science is a very complex production!), Then you must represent how many scientific, technical and production components are tied to the release of the final product! Technology, equipment, materials .... A lot of things. Try to quickly establish the production of the P-36 steam locomotive (think of a steam locomotive for our century) - I think you can’t keep up with the year, but what are the costs ... So it's not so simple! hi
        2. +2
          21 December 2015 12: 38
          You are so worried about all this distrust that additional doubts arise. Hee hee.
          1. -2
            21 December 2015 13: 29
            Quote: Village I ......
            You are so worried about all this mistrust

            I worry about the level of education of our people! hi
        3. +2
          21 December 2015 21: 21
          You are distorting.

          For a flight to the moon, qualitatively different engines are needed. Russia has them. Americans do not.
      3. +2
        21 December 2015 13: 54
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        where did the technology go

        Have we lost a little technology? Not all can now repeat what was done in the USSR. Unfortunately ...
    9. -1
      21 December 2015 11: 12
      Already disproved

      "Dark side of the Moon"

      In the pseudo-documentary film [36], Dark Side of the Moon, released in 2002, an interview was shown with Christiana Kubrick, widow of director Stanley Kubrick. In this film, she mentions that President Nixon, inspired by Kubrick's film 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), called on the director and other Hollywood experts to work together to correct the image of the United States in the lunar program. The film was, in particular, shown on November 16, 2003 by CBS Newsworld [37]. Some major Russian news agencies presented this show as a genuine study proving the reality of the lunar conspiracy, and Christiana Kubrick's interview was seen by proponents of the theory as confirmation that Stanley Kubrick shot the Americans’ landing on the moon in Hollywood [38] [39]. However, already during the scrolling of the credits at the end of the film, it is demonstrated that the interviews in the film are fake and made up of phrases taken out of context or played by actors [40]. Subsequently, the author of the film also confirmed that the film was a well-posed prank [41].
      Moon plot

      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Лунный_заговор
      1. +8
        21 December 2015 11: 20
        Moon plot

        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Лунный_заговор

        .... The source you have, however .... Well at least "Chronicles of Ridik" do not give as arguments .... laughing
        1. +1
          21 December 2015 12: 09
          (no ads for) anyone interested: http: //free-inform.narod.ru/pepelaz/pepelaz-1.htm
    10. +6
      21 December 2015 11: 16
      ..... Well, they would also say that Saturn 5 was only in the layout? ...

      .... I think it was in the original .... But one "BUT" is annoying .... The Americans still cannot repeat this device (starting weight about 3000 tons) .... Why would it be ??? .. .Powerful engines buy from us .... With the departure of Wernher von Braun forgotten how ???? lol
    11. +3
      21 December 2015 11: 26
      Yuri Ignatievich Mukhin gutted this US duck about "Armstrong's adventures on the Moon" long ago, in the book "The Lunar Scam, or Where Were the Americans?"
      When serious people, all kinds of engineers, associate professors with candidates discuss this comic, concocted in the shooting pavilion, we ask ourselves - are they all at home)))
    12. +7
      21 December 2015 11: 33
      Look in the chronicle how our astronauts are taken out after the flight and how astromen vigorously jump out after splashing and give an interview for a briefing! What a wonderful amers descent vehicle on apollo without thermal protection at all and when passing through the atmosphere it didn’t even become smoky!
      http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st55.htm
    13. +4
      21 December 2015 11: 34
      Stanley Kubrick told the truth. At the same time, this truth was known for a long time, at least to doctors of diving medicine. After all, the Apollo had an oxygen atmosphere in their cabins. And oxygen is poison! A seven-day period of breathing is impossible for them!
      1. +1
        22 December 2015 11: 34
        Quote: watermark
        And oxygen is poison!

        Plus, any interaction with hydrocarbons (oil, cream), any spark can cause a fire, the rapid oxidation of any unprotected surface, including strong fermentation of organic matter. There are a lot of questions - there are almost no answers.
    14. Who
      0
      21 December 2015 11: 36
      There was also Saturn, only he brought out not 140 tons, but a "dummy"
    15. -1
      21 December 2015 11: 53
      The Americans on the moon, of course, were. Otherwise, the USSR would not have missed the opportunity to lower the damned capitalism below the plinth for a lie. At least for this, have already been. BUT! One problem turns out. To fly to the moon, and even with the landing and the subsequent launch, we need very advanced technologies. And first of all in engine building.
      Question:
      Where are these technologies? Why do current American missiles fly with Soviet Russian engines? Possessing advanced technologies then, it is quite logical to develop them over the past more than half a century. Even the simplest logic suggests that Americans must have the best space engines. But, in practice, this is not so. The best engines in Russia. But Russia, read the USSR, did not fly to the moon in manned mode.
      And how to understand this paradox?
    16. 0
      21 December 2015 11: 53
      The Americans on the moon, of course, were. Otherwise, the USSR would not have missed the opportunity to lower the damned capitalism below the plinth for a lie. At least for this, have already been. BUT! One problem turns out. To fly to the moon, and even with the landing and the subsequent launch, we need very advanced technologies. And first of all in engine building.
      Question:
      Where are these technologies? Why do current American missiles fly with Soviet Russian engines? Possessing advanced technologies then, it is quite logical to develop them over the past more than half a century. Even the simplest logic suggests that Americans must have the best space engines. But, in practice, this is not so. The best engines in Russia. But Russia, read the USSR, did not fly to the moon in manned mode.
      And how to understand this paradox?
      1. +4
        21 December 2015 16: 13
        This is not a paradox. It's a well-done show, otherwise it's a hoax! At the same time, both the USSR and later Russia normally made concessions to the United States. Sometimes, as in the case of the trick of flying to the moon, there was an exchange of pleasantries: the USSR is silent about the fact that the United States did not fly, and the United States is silent about the fact that the development of virgin and fallow lands in the USSR took place only by a third. Sometimes, as in the case of the Sakhalin incident of September 1, 1983, people bought by the CIA in the Politburo (Shevornadze, Yakovlev, Gorbachev ...) are involved in providing the hoax, and the downed CIA reconnaissance aircraft of the USA turns into a South Korean passenger plane. Sometimes, as in the case of the "terrorist attack" on September 11, simply no one at the state level wants to understand and the classic industrial collapse of buildings turns into a terrorist attack. Actually, this is the "freezing" of morality! But ... the show goes on!
        1. 0
          8 September 2017 19: 17
          there was no "exchange of courtesies" - the Americans bought the Government of the USSR and handed them a bunch of nishtyakov ... Browsty and seduced ... claw stuck - still birdie kirdyk!
          By the way, both Popov and Mukhin - from the wrong end took up this question - but they didn’t succeed!
    17. wow
      0
      21 December 2015 12: 04
      Our cosmonauts, Leonov in particular, confirm that the Americans were still on the moon. Further - the devil knows him ...! Now, after 40 years, they cannot independently create even an orbiting near-earth station ...?
      1. +2
        21 December 2015 15: 38
        I mean, Mr. Leonov saw them on the moon ?!
        So he saw them in Soyuz-19 too!
      2. +4
        21 December 2015 17: 46
        Of course, I respect Leonov as a man and an astronaut, but when they asked him whether he believes in UFOs, then here he has continuous confusion, then he saw it or didn’t, then I believe it is not true. Therefore, what he says about NASA's lunar program must be treated with caution.
        1. Because it was possible to make a film about the landing on the moon and send the transmitter with the recording to the moon for broadcasting to the earth.
        2. It is known that two landed on the moon, but then who was the third who filmed those two from the side?
        3. There were still photos from the back of Armstrong when he left the lunar module who made them? Lunatic
        4. on the GALAXY channel there was a doc film about how to prepare the NASA lunar program and how to design, build rockets, spacesuits, the lunar module. Well, so the lunar module is essentially a can of foil and, with mass and size restrictions, it had two inputs ( hatch and door), which is an impermissible luxury, and they also took with them a variety of equipment, the question is how did they reach and return?
        5. And which of them traveled on the moon on a nuclear vehicle? How was he brought there?
        1. 0
          April 3 2018 21: 38
          And the last Americans still use our eagle spacesuits on the ISS
      3. 0
        8 September 2017 19: 18
        what he was ordered, then he repeats ... a military man cannot disobey the order of higher party workers!
    18. +10
      21 December 2015 12: 16
      Quote: Engineer
      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.

      It is believed that America did not have a carrier with the necessary energy for a manned flight. Saturn 5 could simply deliver a life-support lander only one way. I personally have no doubts that the Americans falsified their Lunar program. Some rubber suits are worth something. Why are all subsequent models of American spacesuits ideologically the same as ours, and not as comfortable and light as on the Moon? How did those suits protect you from solar radiation, including radiation and commonplace overheating? In Earth orbit, for some reason, much heavier spacesuits are required, although in general the conditions are simpler. At the time of "success" America lagged behind the USSR in space technologies by a whole generation - how, without practical experience, it was possible to implement a project so complex in technical terms as landing and takeoff, despite the fact that life support systems had to work like clockwork? The maximum manned flight in 1968 was 13 days (1965) and this was a colossal achievement. You can compare the technical characteristics of the N-1 rocket created up to 1974 and the Saturn-5. With a launch weight of 2950 tons, H-1 could deliver a mass of 5,56 tons to the moon, and 31-34 tons to the moon's orbit, Saturn 5, created 6 years earlier, with approximately the same mass had a lunar module weighing 15 tons. How???? How did the Americans, having a rocket (and an engine) superior in performance to everything that was created in the world before and after, degraded to the point of buying Russian (Soviet) engines and unsuccessfully trying to copy the technology?
    19. 0
      21 December 2015 12: 27
      Kubrick is the Name. Maybe he had evidence?
    20. +3
      21 December 2015 13: 09
      Quote: Engineer
      Well, they would also say that Saturn 5 was only in the layout?

      As an engineer, tell me where is all the miracle of US technology that could throw them on the moon and back?
      Just a logical question arises: if we refuse to throw them on the ISS and do not sell them engines, then they will have to jump on trampolines in the hope of flying somewhere.
      Where is this technology miracle? Where are they?
      1. +9
        21 December 2015 14: 27
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Where is this technology miracle? Where are they?

        And also about the miracle of technology, what about the toilet? It is reliably known that over the years of manned space flight, the Americans have not created their toilet, everyone still uses ours (even in its module there is a toilet we made for them laughing ) Until now, they can’t dock on the opposite side of the earth — only within the visibility of their locators — but the moon did not have their locators, and the calculator installed in their module-type computer ?? And balancing the returning device — a start with two astronauts and a hundred kilograms of stones — but an unbalanced device, is generally an epic fake wassat
    21. The comment was deleted.
    22. +2
      21 December 2015 14: 14
      However, at that time, the Amers did not have spacesuits that could withstand a stay in outer space ... and this is a fact
    23. +2
      21 December 2015 14: 51
      When it is impossible to prove the guilt of a crime directly, it is often possible to prove it using indirect evidence .. Here are two links, the first about the lunar soil that the United States brought (more than 400 kilograms but no one saw more than a few grams of it. And then they lost it altogether. .) http://bolshoyforum.com/wiki/Lunar_soil_ brought_m
    24. EFA
      0
      21 December 2015 15: 11
      Read here, and if you can answer the questions posed there, then the Nobel is provided to you))
    25. The comment was deleted.
    26. 0
      21 December 2015 18: 17
      Are you talking about calculating programs, or about a real flight and landing on the moon, and then returning to Earth?
      And it’s you about the amers who are still flying in Russian orbits to Earth orbit on Russian trucks!
    27. +3
      21 December 2015 20: 56
      Well, they would also say that Saturn 5 was only in the layout? And the Apollo Union Mosfilm fiction?


      Are you an engineer? So what the hell, as an engineer, they dragged here Soyuz-Apollo? Why, as an engineer, do not you say that Apollo (this is how it is written by engineers in the same way) was brought out by the Saturn-1B rocket? Why, as an engineer, keep silent about a complete failure in knowledge about the radiation belt, and that NASA uses information about them only from unmanned spacecraft in high orbits and there is not a single bit of information from the source of Saturn-5. And in general there is nothing. No lunar soil, no scientific texture. For example, textures only from the Lunokhod-1 program, tons of volumes, not less, not the same word, capacious than the US lunar program. So save your fantasies, and study the issue thoroughly. At least to such an extent that would answer the question of why 20 billion of money was spent on the experimental part of the program, and 15 "successful" Saturn-5 launches cost five hundred million? Which means the most successful, cheapest, most advanced and most high-tech and safest program has been scrapped for the shuttle, which ruined NASA's budget and a ton of astronauts.
    28. 0
      21 December 2015 22: 01
      Ashtrays fly to the moon http://www.free-inform.narod.ru/
      - here is mathematics for high school, the engineer should be clear.

      Americans on the moon ... http://www.manonmoon.ru/

      Performance evaluation F1 http://www.manonmoon.ru/articles/st65.pdf
    29. +2
      21 December 2015 22: 57
      Quote: Engineer
      Well, they would also say that Saturn 5 was only in the layout?


      The fact that the film of the landing of astronauts on the moon disappeared from the archive is not very surprising. But the fact that the drawings and those maps of Saturn also disappeared is difficult to explain. Americans cannot build Saturn that once flew. And the missing lunar soil. Too many missing. It is strange that NASA itself has not yet burned to the ground, with all the secrets of American astronautics.
      1. 0
        22 December 2015 14: 53
        Quote: biznaw
        about the fact that the drawings and those maps of Saturn also disappeared is difficult to explain.

        Find:
        1. Drawings and calculators for LV Energia and MAKS Buran
        2. Find the software for the MAKS "Buran" automatic landing system.
        Well, that "unparalleled in the world
        Well, or at least about BTsVEM that were used on Buran.
        But time passed 3 times less.

        So for reference:
        the program of flight and return of Apollo to the Moon in the public domain, it is in assembler






        Apollo Guidance Computer with keyboard and display module




        Memo with a list of "verbs" and "nouns" in the command module panel.
    30. 0
      21 December 2015 23: 12
      the Americans had a heavy rocket capable of lifting the module, but at that moment, and this one too, did not solve the problem of protection from crew radiation and the crew would be guaranteed to die in a week of flight. Therefore, I did not believe that the lunar expedition took place. In 5-10 years, the technologies will be sufficient for this, but at that time, the Americans from the entire program only had a module for removing the ship from the Earth’s surface.
    31. 0
      21 December 2015 23: 32
      but tell me, dear engineer, where are the engines of those heavy-duty rockets? why aren’t the Americans using them now, but on our fly, lost artifacts or something? , but they didn’t ask for unions from us, and they bought them. And what? Far away on the Abacus project the whole world flew away?
      1. 0
        23 December 2015 00: 13
        programs with carriers similar to ours were closed in favor of the shuttle project, because he promised direct military use. So the Americans were left without engines.
        Money in the 70-80 years they had by no means infinitely.
        1. 0
          12 March 2018 21: 37
          Ukrainian Zenit rockets are Energy’s side boosters, and the United States flies into space on N-1 engines.
          That is, nothing was lost in the USSR, not even the soil.
    32. 0
      22 December 2015 08: 50
      Is the Soviet lunar program fantastic? A rocket to fly to the moon was built, all-terrain vehicles did, the astronauts trained ... Also they could have shot our films! The presence of rockets and technical equipment does not mean that there were flights!
    33. 0
      22 December 2015 11: 41
      I’ll tell you as an engineer


      So you tell me as an engineer how they were protected from hard cosmic radiation?
      Here ours cannot, and all flights of the Union and the ISS are in low orbit and protected by the Earth’s magnetic field.
      Please comment as an engineer, by the way, and clarify about cosmic particles. . . .
    34. 0
      22 December 2015 19: 06
      As an engineer, tell us the electromagnetic field of the Earth protects the moon? And how did the Americans solve this problem?
    35. 0
      22 December 2015 20: 49
      http://www.1tv.ru/news/world/298597

      On Channel One, they were sure.
    36. +1
      22 December 2015 23: 48
      Well, they would also say that Saturn 5 was only in the layout? And the Apollo Union Mosfilm fiction?

      Apollo Union is an orbital flight, and the Lunar mission is a flight (and return) to another cosmic body. Different things, including the complexity of implementation.

      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.


      Exaggerated (and confirmed) rumors about the loss (absence?) Of drawings of Saturn-5 and its engines and the purchase by the Americans for a long time of our rocket engines refute this. And what about the dismissal of von Braun (and more than five hundred people who were involved in the implementation of LP) at the very beginning of the so-called "flights to the moon."

      "Impressive excellence - often the result of excellent suggestion!"
    37. +1
      23 December 2015 16: 45
      Systems, yes, are designed for that. This is how they are used. And who said that they were REALLY developed for the calculations of this particular project? They were invented as part of a flight program that did not take place. This does not implore their value. About Saturn-5, there are models that are valid and simply unsuccessful. Where is this "Saturn" or his descendant? In the same place where our H-1 is, why then the USA, they buy rocket engines from us, if they have such a backlog. I am not a specialist in missiles and control systems, but all this is very "catching the eye".
    38. 0
      23 August 2017 10: 57
      Quote: Engineer
      I will tell you as an engineer that such systems as, say, Abacus were developed and used to design and calculate this project.

      But in order for these systems to appear, a Lunar Project was needed. Without it, the US administration would not be able to invest taxpayer money in creating new technologies. The Lunar Project has long been stopped, and technology is working. The idea that the Americans were on the moon is stored in the spinal cord of mankind, and it can’t be knocked out of it in any way. Yes, and many Hollywood films work that way. “Americans on the Moon” is most likely a movie, like “Attack on the Twin Towers”.
    39. 0
      2 September 2017 19: 14
      http://igpr.ru/forum/nasa_reshila_zapretit_posesh
      henie_mest_posadki_appollonov -a ban on visiting Apolon’s landing sites.
    40. 0
      11 March 2018 07: 00
      Yes, here, and not only the engineer understands ... there were radio telescopes that showed where the signal was coming from ... there were optical telescopes that tracked the flight and possibly landing ... and just the radio lovers caught the signal from the moon ... lunar soil transmitted for research in the USSR. ..just the love of the Americans for the show made a movie..piar ...
    41. Say
      0
      23 October 2018 14: 04
      Saturn5, by the way, couldn’t bring Skylab to the calculated orbit and the station left three times ahead of schedule.
      Judging by this, the power of Saturn5 is also three times less than the declared one.
  2. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 32
    Very unexpected!!! belay
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. +7
    21 December 2015 10: 34
    Well, how will we continue to live ????
    1. +4
      21 December 2015 10: 44
      Quote: Good_Taxist
      and how will we continue to live?

      ... silently, if at one time they didn’t react ...
      1. -7
        21 December 2015 10: 58
        Quote: V.ic
        V.ic (4) RU Today, 10: 44 ↑ New

        Quote: Good_Taxist
        and how will we continue to live?

        ... silently, if at one time they didn’t react ...

        Why didn't you react? And are we silent now? Kubrick may have removed the first fix, but only in order to "stake out" the place of "discoverers", and the rest of the expedition is a reality. Otherwise, why did the USSR curtail its program (and no need to talk about accidents)? Collapsed because not "FIRST". The whole project from the states and from Ours is PR and nothing more. Why "waste folk remedies." In my opinion, Americans have been on the moon more than once.
        1. +7
          21 December 2015 11: 03
          Quote: Horst78
          . In my opinion, Americans have been on the moon more than once.

          You messed up mattresses with Dunno !!! hi
          1. +2
            21 December 2015 11: 08
            Quote: sssla
            sssla (5) UA Today, 11: 03 ↑ New

            Quote: Horst78
            . In my opinion, Americans have been on the moon more than once.

            You messed up mattresses with Dunno !!! hi

            Well, if you look like this, then the first on the moon was Karl Friedrich Jerome Baron von Munchausen lol hi
            1. +1
              21 December 2015 12: 47
              Well, if you look like this, then the first on the moon was Karl Friedrich Jerome Baron von Munchausen
              Have mercy ... Cyrano de Bergerac was ahead of him with his novel "Another world, or states and empires of the Moon" (published in 1657). And his, in turn, Francis Godwin with his "Man on the Moon" (1638).
              If you look carefully, then they probably are not the first.
            2. +1
              21 December 2015 12: 52
              No, Munchausen was not the first! The first was Cyrano de Bergerac! And maybe even earlier someone, but it did not reach us. laughing
        2. +2
          21 December 2015 14: 00
          Quote: Horst78
          In my opinion, Americans have been on the moon more than once.

          Go through the thread and think about the content of the article (expedition numbers), then turn on your brains / computer. Pictures of our "rentals" in Selene "Lunokhodov = 1 // 2".
          1. 0
            21 December 2015 19: 48
            Quote: V.ic
            V.ic (4) RU Today, 14: 00 ↑

            Quote: Horst78
            In my opinion, Americans have been on the moon more than once.

            Go through the thread and think about the content of the article (expedition numbers), then turn on your brains / computer. Pictures of our "rentals" in Selene "Lunokhodov = 1 // 2".

            An article about what? About whether there was a landing of people (Americans) on the moon or not. Lunokhods are off topic.
    2. +2
      21 December 2015 10: 49
      Quote: Good_Taxist
      Well, how will we continue to live?


      Everything is fine, beautiful marquise, and we are doing well ....
      We will live, that’s for sure, but how - a worthless question - each according to its charter.
      Well, bullshit was always present, especially if the issue concerned prestige or politics.
      So that ...:
    3. -1
      21 December 2015 12: 24
      Well, how will we continue to live ????
      Chef, the mustache is gone! laughing
  5. +17
    21 December 2015 10: 34
    If such information began to emerge, it means that the world behind the scenes decided to put an end to the United States.
    We are waiting for new throws on the twin towers ...
    1. +5
      21 December 2015 10: 51
      Quote: Gorinich
      We are waiting for new throws on the twin towers ...

      What is waiting for them, and so everything is clear -
      1. +2
        21 December 2015 11: 32
        Or else -
        1. +1
          23 December 2015 19: 40
          In fact, it was a planned demolition of the building with a nuclear charge laid 50 meters below the foundation of the buildings. It turns out that according to the urban planning standards of New York, it is impossible to build a skyscraper without providing dismantling technology. But today they do not know how to disassemble this iron fortress-skyscraper. So they placed a nuclear charge to circumvent the rules. Look for the author of the idea- Dmitry Khalezov.
    2. +2
      21 December 2015 11: 04
      Quote: Gorinich
      We are waiting for new stuffing

      Are you still waiting ??? Nuuu then your powder)))
  6. -1
    21 December 2015 10: 35
    Tired of these stupid canoes.
  7. +10
    21 December 2015 10: 35
    Well? Really a fat point in the moon program or another throw and PR of the US space program? belay belay
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 11: 04
      Eli, the smaller states would try to destroy the USSR, because of the competition in space, the USA or the USSR (in this case, the Russian Federation) were already jumping on Mars what
  8. +34
    21 December 2015 10: 36
    And the truth! In 1968 it was still problematic to take off from the Earth, but here - to land on the moon, jump outside, take off again, and then a gap for 50 years ... After such a "triumph"! Not logical somehow. And yet you can't hide an awl in a sack ...
    1. +13
      21 December 2015 10: 57
      Quote: oldseaman1957
      But the truth! In 1968, it was still problematic to take off from the Earth, and here - to take a break, jump outside, take off again, and then a gap of 50 years ..

      Considering that we were the first to launch the "squeaker" into orbit, and the Americans were grunt! -direct "space rangers"! so good !!! wassat
      1. 0
        21 December 2015 11: 06
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        yes so well !!!

        And not a single puncture on the moon !!! In addition to a spill of water there)) But there is also not a bunch of questions but Everest questions !!!!!
      2. +7
        21 December 2015 11: 07
        As far as I remember from the course of school astronomy around the Earth, along with the magnetic field there is an invisible radiation field that kills all life. How could they fly back and forth to stay alive, and even if they had survived, after a month of flight they would have already gone to the cemetery from radiation sickness. And who wants to watch the video, how they get out of the ship after the flight - peppy, clean and shaved. It was as if we were traveling in an SV carriage with all the amenities. And ours look after the flight - tired, lost weight and cannot even stand by themselves, so the lack of gravity makes itself felt.
    2. +6
      21 December 2015 11: 07
      Quote: oldseaman1957
      And the truth! In 1968 it was still problematic to take off from the Earth, but here - to land on the moon, jump outside, take off again, and then a gap for 50 years ... After such a "triumph"! Not logical somehow. And yet you can't hide an awl in a sack ...

      Ren TV look - there they will tell you how reptilians or aliens forced the USA to wind down the lunar program laughing
    3. +6
      21 December 2015 11: 19
      Quote: oldseaman1957
      And the truth! In 1968 it was still problematic to take off from the Earth, but here - to land on the moon, jump outside, take off again, and then a gap for 50 years ... After such a "triumph"! Not logical somehow. And yet you can't hide an awl in a sack ...

      So in the 60s of the last century, the first supersonic passenger aircraft were created. And then bam and 50 years of silence ... But were these aircraft?! ... laughing
      1. +1
        21 December 2015 12: 44
        Quote: Fitter65
        And then bam and 50 years of silence ... But were these planes ?!

        In 1978, I pasted a detailed page from a magazine into my demobilization album, on it in flight TU 144, so somehow my son showed his children, that is, my grandchildren, photos in this album (and this was just recently) and asks me that they say this is a passenger plane here, I told them everything I know about this plane. They admired this machine together, and to myself I thought that the best, or at least the same, supersonic passenger aircraft had not yet been built. I seem to understand the reasons for this, but it's a pity anyway.
    4. +2
      21 December 2015 13: 31
      Quote: oldseaman1957
      And the truth! In 1968 it was still problematic to take off from the Earth, but here - to land on the moon, jump outside, take off again, and then a gap for 50 years ... After such a "triumph"! Not logical somehow. And yet you can't hide an awl in a sack ...

      First, with us, too, in your opinion, is not logical? The USSR was the first to land the device on the Moon, landed on Venus, flew to Mars, etc. And then - "50 years gap"?
      Secondly, the "sensational" interview of allegedly Kubrick looks very strange in the dark, and not in studio lighting.
      Although, there are a lot of questions for Americans with their lunar program (I respect Mukhin for his engineering approach to the topic).
  9. +6
    21 December 2015 10: 36
    A dream factory in action, all their life cheat Naglosaksa.
  10. +4
    21 December 2015 10: 36
    Give moonseach for some reason, all lovers of this conspiracy theory do not give comments on Soviet specialists. And most of them claim that they do not doubt the reality of the landing. fellow
    1. +10
      21 December 2015 10: 41
      Gored by these moonbearers. About two weeks ago, this stuffing was in "Komsomolskaya Pravda" with the reservation of the author of the article that for himself he personally does not question the conclusion about the presence of amers on the Moon, and let the rest think whatever they like.
      The best way to check is to fly and see the lunar modules with your own eyes. laughing .
      1. +2
        21 December 2015 10: 46
        Quote: inkass_98
        The best way to check is to fly and see the lunar modules with your own eyes.

        Excuse me, but will they give out pennies for this crap Ssy-shi-a?
        1. -1
          21 December 2015 11: 49
          Quote: V.ic
          Excuse me, but will they give out pennies for this crap Ssy-shi-a?

          From what crossroads ??? This let Thomas unbeliever highlight! wink
          1. 0
            21 December 2015 14: 09
            [quote = V.ic] Excuse me, but will they allocate penises for this crap Ssy-shi-a?
            [quote = Bayonet] From what cross? [/ quote]
            What kind of overlap? "Сiasteczki" / "Cookies" are over, you need to shell out extra money ... mb. "our" oligarchs will fork out?
      2. +4
        21 December 2015 10: 51
        For 50 years now, gentlemen, journalists and "experts" have been answering the question: "Were the Americans on the moon or not?" The best answer to this question was the cosmonaut Leonov. Said that the entire US lunar program was accompanied by our national trackers. And, if there were no Americans on the moon, the USSR would not fail to declare this.
        1. +7
          21 December 2015 11: 00
          Quote: Army 2
          For 50 years now, gentlemen, journalists and "experts" have been answering the question: "Were the Americans on the moon or not?" The best answer to this question was the cosmonaut Leonov. Said that the entire US lunar program was accompanied by our national trackers. And, if there were no Americans on the moon, the USSR would not fail to declare this.

          we only know what we are allowed to know ...
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. +2
        21 December 2015 11: 10
        Quote: inkass_98
        The best way to check is to fly and see the lunar modules with your own eyes.

        And where so many rockets to find so that everyone with their own eyes ???
      5. +2
        23 December 2015 19: 44
        No need to fly. Americans themselves have shown that the whole flight is bullshit- 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.
    2. +10
      21 December 2015 10: 43
      What kind of specialists? Cosmonaut Leonov? And it’s unpleasant in old age to admit that you were bred, like a sucker
      1. -3
        21 December 2015 11: 56
        Quote: Saber
        What kind of specialists? Cosmonaut Leonov? And it’s unpleasant in old age to admit that you were bred, like a sucker

        I think not long to wait for new pictures. I would very much like to look at the physiognomy of those who, owing to their ignorance or just stupidity, scum not only NASA, but also their astronauts and scientists!hi
        1. -1
          21 December 2015 13: 06
          They already exist, and in high resolution so there were flights, landings too www.nasa.gov/image-feature/nov-19-1969-apollo-12-lunar-module-intrepid
        2. 0
          21 December 2015 14: 11
          Quote: Bayonet
          I think not long to wait for new pictures. I would very much like to look at the physiognomy of those who, owing to their ignorance or just stupidity, scum not only NASA, but also their astronauts and scientists!

          Why watch that ... They'll say the pictures are mounted in some kind of paramarams, and in general the rockets cannot fly because they don't flap their wings ... I read the comments and the classic "who smoked herbarium" is spinning in my head ...
        3. +1
          23 December 2015 19: 46
          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. +2
      21 December 2015 10: 48
      Quote: Hello
      Give moonseach for some reason, all lovers of this conspiracy theory do not give comments on Soviet specialists. And most of them claim that they do not doubt the reality of the landing.

      I think it’s not long to wait - the Chinese comrades are getting close to her - they will put all the points over E. At the first flyby it will be clear who was there and who was not.
      It will turn out like in that joke - For so many years, from the solar radiation, the American flag burned out and turned white - the Chinese decided that the first on the moon were the French. laughing
      1. +5
        21 December 2015 10: 56
        Quote: lelikas
        I think it’s not long to wait - the Chinese comrades are getting close to her - they will put all the points over E. At the first flyby it will be clear who was there and who was not.

        -------------------------
        Ours were on the moon in the form of lunar rover robots.
        1. +1
          21 December 2015 11: 13
          Quote: Altona
          Ours were on the moon in the form of lunar rover robots.

          So no one denies that the mattresses on the moon were BUT equipment and not people !!!
      2. -3
        21 December 2015 12: 32
        I think it’s not long to wait - the Chinese comrades are approaching her in full - they will put all the points over Yo
        As if these same comrades, even if there were Americans on the Moon, did not wipe all the evidence and find a well-preserved parchment with ancient Chinese inscriptions 10 thousand years old in the crevice of a meteorite crater and the ancient Chinese wall in the Lomonosov crater laughing
    4. +2
      21 December 2015 10: 59
      Quote: Hello
      Give moonseach for some reason, all lovers of this conspiracy theory do not give comments on Soviet specialists. And most of them claim that they do not doubt the reality of the landing. fellow
      so the "heads of state" do not deny, there is some kind of deal, and ours YET, comply with the conditions.
    5. 0
      21 December 2015 11: 08
      Quote: Hello
      lovers of this conspiracy theory do not comment on Soviet specialists

      And how many specialists over 70 years ago (and there were specials) said that the Germans would not attack the USSR ??? ))) Ilya just do not need it, huh ???
      1. +1
        21 December 2015 11: 11
        Quote: sssla
        sssla (5) UA Today, 11: 08 ↑ New

        Quote: Hello
        lovers of this conspiracy theory do not comment on Soviet specialists

        And how many specialists over 70 years ago (and there were specials) said that the Germans would not attack the USSR ??? ))) Ilya just do not need it, huh ???

        Well, before comparing to a psychiatric hospital you can. The USSR had all the technical capabilities of tracking American flights. So they were silent because they saw that they were flying.
    6. -1
      21 December 2015 11: 47
      Quote: Hello
      Give moonseach for some reason, all lovers of this conspiracy theory do not give comments on Soviet specialists. And they for the most part claim that they have no doubt in the reality of the landing

      Because these "conspiracy lovers" consider their specialists "sold out" and "liberals"! smile
  11. +9
    21 December 2015 10: 37
    One can expect such a thing from the USA, bluffing and falsehood are their inherent attributes !!!
  12. HAM
    +8
    21 December 2015 10: 38
    What, what, and the Yankees have always been able to masterfully lie ...
    1. +2
      21 December 2015 11: 14
      Quote: HAM
      What, what, and the Yankees have always been able to masterfully lie ...

      This is the basis of their life !!!
  13. +11
    21 December 2015 10: 38
    Too many questions for this program. Something was lost, then lost, then destroyed.
    1. +10
      21 December 2015 10: 43
      Yeah, it seems, they flew to the moon, and they are not able to make engines on their rockets. Scammers
  14. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 39
    I am interested in something else - why was the USSR silent? We then owned any different technology with a bang.
    Or maybe just stuffing, what would be nervous.
    1. +2
      21 December 2015 10: 46
      Quote: Barracuda
      I am interested in something else - why was the USSR silent?

      and now why are we silent?
    2. +4
      21 December 2015 10: 51
      Why do you have a middle-class USSR? "The USSR was silent" !!!
      1. -2
        21 December 2015 11: 33
        Because I’m hurrying to work, I could have made a mistake. Wise guy damn ..
      2. 0
        21 December 2015 11: 39
        Quote: Tiger4
        Why do you have a middle-class USSR? "The USSR was silent" !!!


        Because:
        Feel free to go to battle For the power of the Soviets
        And as one die In the struggle for it ...
    3. +6
      21 December 2015 11: 59
      Quote: Barracuda
      I am interested in something else - why was the USSR silent? We then owned any different technology with a bang.

      Here you need to look deeper and wider.
      It was at that time that "suddenly" the Union was allowed to supply oil and gas to Western Europe, and "relief" along the KOCOM line also "suddenly" began.
      And the famous "detente" came exactly on the wave of "technological superiority" of the USA, which does not at all fit with the traditional practice of yuser to speak from a position of strength in spite of any slightest superiority.

      The impartial conclusion suggests itself that silence was simply paid for.
  15. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 39
    Another beautiful fairy tale was taken from Humanity. It is not right!
    1. +3
      21 December 2015 10: 49
      Quote: ibu355yandex.ru
      Another beautiful fairy tale was taken from Humanity. It is not right!

      Then there were two - our second did not fly, although everything was almost ready, but the program was canceled.
  16. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 40
    You can only check in person by visiting the moon at the landing sites of the lunar modules laughing
    So the answer to the question - whether the Americans were on the moon - will be received only after the mass settlement of people there, and this is not very soon, besides, options are possible.
    1. 0
      21 December 2015 10: 48
      Quote: vadimtt
      the answer to the question - whether the Americans were on the moon - will be received only after the mass settlement of people there, and this is not very soon, besides, options are possible.

      ... that's right, sir. The necessary props will be delivered to the desired point on the surface of Selena.
  17. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 41
    Well, this is already a bust. The landing of the Americans on the Moon is an achievement of all mankind. An article by another lover of fried wrote, it was not worth publishing it.
    1. +5
      21 December 2015 10: 49
      Quote: Dimon19661
      Americans landing on the moon is achievement of all mankind

      Forgot add pro "small step".
      1. +1
        21 December 2015 11: 06
        Quote: V.ic
        Quote: Dimon19661
        Americans landing on the moon is achievement of all mankind

        Forgot add pro "small step".
        + good
    2. +1
      21 December 2015 11: 21
      Quote: Dimon19661
      Well, this is already a bust. The landing of the Americans on the Moon is the achievement of all mankind

      blessed is he who believes ... (c)
      1. +12
        21 December 2015 11: 37
        There are very serious and well-reasoned studies, not only in Russia, but also in America, about the "moon bluff" of the Americans. He who is interested will always find.
    3. +2
      23 December 2015 19: 48
      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.
  18. +2
    21 December 2015 10: 41
    How tired of these "researchers". So they crawl out of all the cracks like cockroaches. Well, here, on a very serious site, why spread nonsense?
    1. +2
      23 December 2015 19: 49
      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.
  19. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 41
    It is unlikely that the Soviets would become silent in this case. Controls already existed.
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 11: 17
      Quote: Mexovoy
      Controls already existed.

      And how were they carried out "your" controls ??? Do you personally know ??? Or, again, infa read in one "smart" book or in the media ??? You still tell that SOI is reality and mattress covers with laser knives cut bread at home !!!
    2. +2
      21 December 2015 11: 28
      .... It is unlikely that the Soviets would become silent in this case. Controls already existed ....


      ... What means ???? .... Modern satellites have a resolution of about 2m and then in low orbit (300-600 km) .... And how many kilometers to the moon ???? .... And what did they see there ???? .... "Hubble" at that time was not ... lol
  20. +5
    21 December 2015 10: 42
    Landing of USA on the Moon, "SOI", .... empire of "truth" damn-n-nn-nnn ... reckless correspondence of "the anus" "of our" liberals "to" the penis "of the Western (from the word" zapadlo ") sponsor.
  21. +4
    21 December 2015 10: 43
    Americans always shoot films where they ALSO KEEPS, kick ass even to aliens. And ours shoot films where Russia REALLY kicked the ass of "not invited guests" By the way, they seem to be like queues.
  22. +13
    21 December 2015 10: 43
    Kubrick’s wife has already stated that this interview is fake. She is sure that her husband never gave such an interview, since she always knew about all his meetings.
    Evgeny Leonov also absolutely confidently states that the Americans were on the moon and that there is objective evidence to support this.
    Filming of landings may well be shot in the studio. With the technical equipment of that time, high-quality shooting in space could not work. So the very existence of a fake of the landing shoots does not mean the absence of the landings themselves.
    Lunar soil was delivered to the earth and distributed between the scientific laboratories of several countries, including the USSR.
    It will be possible to challenge the primacy of the Americans on the Moon only if there is indisputable evidence of the absence of traces of their landings on the satellite's surface.
    While there is no such evidence, there is no point in arguing.
    1. +6
      21 December 2015 10: 53
      Kubrick's wife may still want to live ... Evgeny Leonov is a pilot-cosmonaut, not a design engineer. The presence of forgeries suggests that one should not believe without looking back at the one who forges. Try to get a few grams of lunar soil for research from 400 kg? Some tried, but did not get it ... And soon the soil will be thrown out like garbage, as the originals of the "moon surveys" used
      1. -1
        21 December 2015 11: 10
        Statements that the Americans on the moon were not started immediately with their flights to the moon. And in America itself. None of the applicants died. This topic constantly floats on the websites of theorists of all kinds of conspiracies and no one cares what they write there.
        The main arguments of the "theoreticians" are precisely the falsity of filming and the chain of deaths among astronauts.
        But in the absence of real evidence, all this is from the category - "grandma told."
        At parades in the USSR, we also carried mock-ups by area, rather than real missiles. Does anyone doubt rockets?
        1. +7
          21 December 2015 11: 21
          Quote: Stranger
          None of the applicants died.

          Especially 11 astronauts with "honest" tongues did not die !!
        2. 0
          21 December 2015 11: 53
          what "real" proof do you need? The "astronauts" must prove. But from them there is no irrefutable evidence! but in a great variety of evidence there are mirrored or inverted pictures from automatic stations, frames taken in pavilions, etc. This cannot but lead to certain thoughts, don't you think?
          Was the missile prototype carried because the actual delivery of real missiles was too expensive? like flying to the moon
    2. +2
      21 December 2015 10: 54
      Quote: Stranger
      Lunar soil was delivered to the ground

      Where, then, did almost three centners of "American" soil go?
      1. +1
        21 December 2015 11: 21
        Quote: V.ic
        almost three

        FOUR + -
    3. +8
      21 December 2015 10: 54
      Quote: Stranger
      Kubrick’s wife has already stated that this interview is fake.

      Maybe she wants to die with her death, so she’s ready to say everything they write to her.
      Quote: Stranger
      Evgeny Leonov also absolutely confidently states that the Americans were on the moon and that there is objective evidence to support this.

      Firstly, cosmonaut Alexei Leonov and not Eugene. Secondly - recently quite a few strange statements have been made from Leonov (about space, about politics, about economy, about the USSR).
    4. +3
      21 December 2015 11: 08
      Quote: Stranger
      It will be possible to challenge the primacy of the Americans on the Moon only if there is indisputable evidence of the absence of traces of their landings on the satellite's surface.

      the reverse is also not. lost all the docks ... it happens yes? request
    5. +3
      21 December 2015 11: 20
      Quote: Stranger
      Kubrick’s wife has already stated that this interview is fake. She is sure that her husband never gave such an interview, since she always knew about all his meetings.

      Not every wife knows where her husband's nest is !! I beg of you !! She lives there !! She will not say anything else !!
      1. 0
        21 December 2015 11: 29
        If she had declared that the interview might be true, she would have earned not frail loot. And no one would take it away. They would simply say that the grandmother wanted to earn extra money, and that would be the end of it.
    6. -1
      21 December 2015 11: 23
      Sorry - Of course, Alexei Leonov. Eugeney is just more to my liking, that's wrong.
    7. 0
      21 December 2015 14: 43
      Quote: Stranger
      Lunar soil was delivered to the earth and distributed between the scientific laboratories of several countries, including the USSR.

      3 grams of soil from the delivered 400 kg were delivered to the USSR in the form of large stones, no one examined these stones and now they have disappeared. Namely large stones were positioned as assembled by hand — the robot could not do this.
    8. 0
      23 December 2015 13: 54
      Please tell me where can I find out the results of a study of lunar soil in the USSR?
  23. +2
    21 December 2015 10: 43
    Does the US moon scam have a fat point?
  24. 0
    21 December 2015 10: 43
    In my opinion, for what purpose, for what money or profit, did Mr. Kubrick decide before his death to promote himself with his secret interview? I don't know. However, anyone who is more or less interested in space research knows that the Apollo mission, in addition to landing a man, also included a number of scientific tasks, for example, the installation of laser reflectors, thanks to which the exact distance from our planet to the Moon is still measured. Also there was a lunar buggy and traces from it and the tracks of astronauts. So all the talk about the "great forgery" is nonsense of fans of the theory of a universal conspiracy)
    1. -1
      21 December 2015 11: 29
      In order !
      Quote: znorick
      for example, the installation of laser reflectors, thanks to which they still measure the exact distance from our planet to the moon.

      The USSR did not send people to the moon BUT the Soviet corner reflectors are standing there and believe the mattresses on them and measure the distance)))
      Quote: znorick
      Also there was a moon buggy and traces from it and traces of astronauts.

      To work with a corner reflector without any problems. And how do you answer to find out that there are really traces there, besides making a real landing, and record these traces and buggies live ???

      Quote: znorick
      So all the talk about the "great forgery" is nonsense

      Just ravings and your statements in defense of mattresses hi
    2. +1
      23 December 2015 19: 52
      Laser reflectors? SLR! And the Soviet Lunokhods very simply carried them on 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.
  25. +8
    21 December 2015 10: 44
    The topic has already been discussed a hundred times. How long to? The specialists of Roscosmos have no questions, because all telemetry of events was also filmed by our observation devices.
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 11: 31
      Quote: ARES623
      The topic has already been discussed a hundred times. How long to

      If I personally am NOT interested in discussing something there, I am NOT discussing !!!
  26. +6
    21 December 2015 10: 44
    Oh, on Military Review they begin to quietly write nonsense ... laughing
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 10: 55
      Quote: Dazdranagon
      Oh, on Military Review they begin to quietly write nonsense ...

      Are you talking about your comment?
      1. -3
        21 December 2015 11: 34
        Quote: Dazdranagon
        begin to quietly write nonsense ...

        Bullshit is your 5 cents hi
      2. 0
        21 December 2015 11: 42
        Quote: V.ic
        Are you talking about your comment?
        - Vaganych, is that you? No, I'm not talking about my comment, but about the article! If you were interested in this material, you would be aware that the Americans have a video recording of the passage of a Soviet satellite over them! Those. the management has no questions about this! hi
        1. 0
          21 December 2015 12: 31
          Quote: Dazdranagon
          that the Americans have a video recording of the flight of a Soviet satellite over them!

          Where can I see it ??????? Well, yes I am presenting the answer)) Or rather everything will become on my question)))))
          1. 0
            21 December 2015 13: 13
            Quote: sssla
            Where can I see it ??????? Well, yes I am presenting the answer)) Or rather everything will become on my question))))
            - at the moment I can’t say exactly the name of the documentary with these shots. But if you have not seen this, this does not mean that this was not.
        2. +1
          23 December 2015 19: 54
          And watch another 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.
  27. +6
    21 December 2015 10: 44
    The good man was Kubrick. Earth rest in peace!
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 10: 58
      Quote: Saber
      The good man was Kubrick. Earth rest in peace!

      Honored PLUS YOU! Half of the commentators who are writing angry matches now will not be able to remember the end of the first scene of “2001: A Space Odyssey”.
  28. +4
    21 December 2015 10: 45
    The silence of the USSR and the approval of some cosmonauts and flightless industry experts are already the only argument in favor of the reality of the landing. All other arguments are against.
  29. +4
    21 December 2015 10: 45
    Cool theme for a military review!
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 11: 51
      And here they drag everything in a row, if only the Yankees pinch once again.
  30. +4
    21 December 2015 10: 45
    The moon landing, the September 11 attacks, the killing of bin Laden are all Hollywood productions. Hollywood is America’s main weapon with which the United States subjugated half the world.
  31. 0
    21 December 2015 10: 46
    All this is garbage. Hangars in the Nevada desert? And where do you think they should have trained before flying, in the wilds of Messuri ?! The whole world, including we monitored the flight, it is possible to emit a landing, but they flew there it is 100%.
    1. +2
      21 December 2015 10: 59
      how exactly did the whole world follow?
    2. +6
      21 December 2015 11: 00
      Quote: Barboskin
      in the wilds of Messuri ?!

      And where is it? No.
    3. +3
      21 December 2015 11: 05
      The USSR traced the fact that in 1969 something flew to the moon from the earth, and what exactly was there and no data at all flew away. This is what Leonov says.
    4. +1
      21 December 2015 13: 29
      After the avatar’s blockbuster, grandmothers scolded Putin at the entrance, saying that the Americans first landed on a Pandora.
  32. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 46
    Stanley Kubrick was silent, of course, the main performer of the deception of the century. But no light, a decorator, ......... In the best, for astronauts of the USA, the alignment on the moon was, and the report was faked. Somehow I want to believe fellow countryman Leonov Alexei Arkhipovich who said in an interview that the Americans were on the moon. America has been caught a little surprising on lies more than once.
    1. +3
      21 December 2015 11: 11
      Quote: Bort Radist
      Somehow I want to believe fellow countryman Leonov Alexei Arkhipovich who said in an interview that the Americans were on the moon.

      as he saw aliens many times ... this is already alarming. what
      1. +1
        21 December 2015 11: 22
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        as he saw aliens many times ... this is already alarming.

        I also saw a couple of times - what to do now - such a life ..
        1. +1
          21 December 2015 11: 53
          Quote: lelikas
          I also saw a couple of times - what to do now - such a life ..

          you are ... more careful with alcohol! wink lol hi
          1. +1
            21 December 2015 12: 50
            Quote: Andrey Yurievich
            you are ... more careful with alcohol!

            He was young (not insanity) and absolutely sober (not a squirrel) - he didn’t see the little men themselves - but there were definitely UFOs, if in the first case there is still doubt, then the second is 100%. None of ours could do this in the sky. Almost like in classified materials.
            1. +1
              21 December 2015 13: 12
              UFO - this does not mean aliens, it is an unrecognized flying object. I also saw a couple of times it is not clear what. The first time it was in the evening, in the summer, many people walked on the street, everyone saw - a luminous ball appeared in the sky, three more floated one from it, but each was a little less bright than the previous ones. Then they slowly melted. Another time it was at night, not so beautiful, but in general it is not clear. An asterisk flew across the sky, as it happens when a plane flies high, unblinking. What was amazing was how she turned and flew at an acute angle, that is, in one moment at one point. There was no arc at all, not even a small one. That's impossible! Or maybe? Tell me if you know. hi
      2. +1
        21 December 2015 13: 55
        Leonov is one thing, but the likelihood of such a complex operation is negligible. Before that, the Americans simply could not get to the moon with probes, then they could provide a soft landing, and then, fuck, and the most difficult landings, dockings, take-offs on another planet. Fiction and Hollywood. And the same turbidity with the towers. A bunch of camel workers learned to fly on airplanes, captured them at the same time, brought them to the right places and destroyed the towers. Top-notch dregs and noodles.
        1. 0
          21 December 2015 16: 05
          Yes, this is nonsense abruptly Israeli, anti-ballistic missile system, which hits warheads in space.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      3. 0
        21 December 2015 14: 56
        Quote: Andrey Yurievich
        so he and aliens saw many times ... this is already alarming

        He was the first to go into open space, and was born in the village of Listvyanka, Tisulsky District. This is the achievement of a dream. The cosmonaut squad respected him. He is an artist, and he has his own view. In general, he is forgiven))
  33. +4
    21 December 2015 10: 48
    Here, after all, either there is a secret conspiracy between the United States and the former USSR, on the non-disclosure of the secret of the "non-landing", or there was a landing. Moreover, I do not exclude that some shots, for the sake of brilliance, could have been re-shot in the studio, but if there had been no landing, the USSR would have known for sure. The tracking stations recorded the signal, so there is no direct forgery. The question of how exactly everything went, in fact, probably we will not soon find out ...
    1. +1
      23 December 2015 19: 56
      Yes, it didn’t pass; everything was fabricated. 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.
  34. +5
    21 December 2015 10: 48
    here the Chinese fly to the moon, remove the Apollo landing site, then it can be said with 99% certainty))
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 11: 01
      The Japanese probe took off, and the Indian.
      1. +3
        21 December 2015 11: 23
        Quote: voyaka uh
        The Japanese probe took off, and the Indian.

        And where can you see the pictures themselves?
      2. +3
        21 December 2015 11: 24
        Quote: voyaka uh
        The Japanese probe took off, and the Indian.

        they say ...
  35. 0
    21 December 2015 10: 49
    If not fake, then impressive.
  36. +4
    21 December 2015 10: 50
    As there Konstantin Sergeevich Stanislavsky used to say: "I don't believe!"
  37. 0
    21 December 2015 10: 50
    Personally, I am ready to believe. The conspiracy theory, to which some are inclined to discuss the article, has nothing to do with it. This is a geopolitical strategy of controlled chaos, and chaos, as you know, begins in the head. Global lies, hoaxes and provocations are the must-have tools of this strategy. This does not exclude work on a project that could be closed for various reasons, and the achievements of which (mentioned above by the Engineer) could be thrown into general use with the aim of spurring the waste of resources on similar projects in other countries, increase the prestige of the United States, etc.
  38. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 51
    The article is complete bullshit. The Americans could not deceive the intelligence of the Soviet Union. Intelligence, radio intelligence and all the rest. Surely the technical services of the USSR accompanied the missiles of the expeditions, direction-finding radio communications, listened, decrypted and did everything possible. It was impossible to imitate everything.
    1. +3
      21 December 2015 11: 01
      what prevented the launch of a tape recorder with a recording into orbit (and even the Moon) (Houston, Houston, we have problems "
      1. 0
        22 December 2015 11: 23
        Quote: Saber
        what prevented the launch of a tape recorder with a recording into orbit (and even the Moon) (Houston, Houston, we have problems "

        And I think you have problems! hi
    2. +3
      21 December 2015 11: 25
      Quote: midashko
      The Americans could not deceive the intelligence of the Soviet Union.

      probably not to deceive, agree, why not?
    3. EFA
      +4
      21 December 2015 15: 26
      And you do not allow the idea that it was a kind of deal between the countries?
    4. +1
      23 December 2015 19: 59
      And they did not deceive the USSR. The CPSU sold its silence very dearly. What powerful five-year periods were with the help of amers. Kammaz was built here. They got a cheap grain. In general, 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.
  39. +3
    21 December 2015 10: 51
    The Apollo 11 landing is likely to be staged, like the Apollo 12. The real manned mission was Apollo 13 (as everyone knows, it broke down on the road), and the real landings were already from Apollo 14. At the same time, all the Apollo were actually launched, but until the 13th they were unmanned and test, they were assigned to test various components and assemblies. The 11th also delivered a transponder to the moon's surface, which was supposed to confirm the legend of the landing.

    This version looks quite believable. All the starts were real, no doubt, as they were watched by hundreds of thousands of people, moreover, live, but unmanned and controlled from the Earth. And the landing of people was starting from Apollo 14, not earlier.
    1. +1
      23 December 2015 20: 00
      But watch the video from the opus on the meeting of Apollo 13. 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.
  40. +6
    21 December 2015 10: 53
    not a fact! there is still no evidence! Kubrick said and died, but we are breaking our heads! I set the task !!
  41. +7
    21 December 2015 10: 54
    Off topic, but HE WOULD KNOW. STALIN's birthday was, why not a word on "VO"? It's strange somehow ... Did they go to Israel to sunbathe ..
    1. +3
      21 December 2015 11: 24
      Baracuda ..... Whether sunbathing left for Israel ..

      They did not leave. I suspect that the VO server is located there.
      I judge by several of their punctures.
      1. +1
        21 December 2015 11: 38
        As far as I know, the server was in Germany. They themselves said orally. request
      2. 0
        22 December 2015 11: 34
        Command line: Tracert topwar.ru
      3. The comment was deleted.
  42. 0
    21 December 2015 10: 55
    At the moment, it’s hard to say whether or not astronauts were on the moon. For several NASA flights, a huge amount of cargo, yellow modules and other equipment were delivered to the moon. The question was why this program was so quickly curtailed when all the main work was completed. And why the USA at the moment sent the shuttle program does not have its own ships for flights to the ICAC. The question is more than answers, and the answer will be only when our or other countries can send their astronauts to the moon.
    1. +3
      21 December 2015 11: 04
      It seems to me that this will be the Russian-Chinese crew.
  43. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 55
    From the country of victorious crooks, this is not what you can expect!
  44. +3
    21 December 2015 10: 56
    What about flying, landing and returning for a piece of iron, well, at that time this is not fantasy, but reality. BUT a person, a living creature, fly through the radiation belt practically in an iron can, and even return safe and sound. "I am plagued by vague doubts," as they say. And then they completely forgot about the moon. Too unsafe and too expensive.
    1. 0
      22 December 2015 11: 33
      Too unsafe and too expensive.

      Another question: why throw out a lot of money 6 times?
      So that guys all over the world show off with golf clubs?
  45. +1
    21 December 2015 10: 57
    Quote: ostrom
    The question is how exactly everything went, in fact,

    This is the whole thing, they landed on the moon, sat and started back, and the rest of the "movie" !?
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 11: 37
      Quote: Bort Radist
      This is the whole thing, they landed on the moon, sat and started back, and the rest of the "movie" !?

      Truth and only truth !!
  46. 0
    21 December 2015 10: 58
    The "dying" interview itself is a pure fake.
    Since Kubrick himself died, he could no longer refute the fake.

    More interesting why Americans canceled flights
    three more Apollo: 18,19 and 20. Although ships and missiles were already built, and crews
    were fully prepared?
    1. -6
      21 December 2015 11: 02
      Quote: voyaka uh
      voyaka uh IL Today, 10: 58 New

      The "dying" interview itself is a pure fake.
      Since Kubrick himself died, he could no longer refute the fake.
      Totally agree
      Quote: voyaka uh
      More interesting why Americans canceled flights
      three more Apollo: 18,19 and 20. Although ships and missiles were already built, and crews
      were fully prepared?

      Maybe due to the fact that the USSR curtailed the program. Nose tips wiped, technology worked, why spend money?
      1. +2
        21 December 2015 11: 40
        Quote: Horst78
        Maybe due to the fact that the USSR curtailed the program. Nose tips wiped, technology worked, why spend money?

        If the flight is true, then you would have lost your first flight as you put it !! Why the rest of the flights ?? According to your version, why was money down the drain ?? Well and it !!!! Discrepancies and not proofs on the part of the mattress
        1. -1
          21 December 2015 12: 01
          Quote: sssla
          sssla (5) UA Today, 11: 40 ↑ New

          Quote: Horst78
          Maybe due to the fact that the USSR curtailed the program. Nose tips wiped, technology worked, why spend money?

          If the flight is true, then you would have lost your first flight as you put it !! Why the rest of the flights ?? According to your version, why was money down the drain ?? Well and it !!!! Discrepancies and not proofs on the part of the mattress

          Read my comments above. 1 Kubrick really could take off a linden since time played against. 2 The subsequent flights were real (maybe 2 was also sticky). 3 flew to master technology. They squeezed out everything they could, therefore, and canceled the last flights.
          1. 0
            23 December 2015 20: 04
            Watch the video from the opus, everything was linden. Even in the Soyuz-Apollo program, the design, manufacture and testing of the dock was for the USSR. The Americans took upon themselves competent media coverage. This is their level!
      2. +1
        21 December 2015 11: 57
        But did the Apollo launch and watch-cry the wounded Russians or not? 11 don't cry, 12 don't cry ... 17 Yeah! cry! cancel 18, the nose is wiped
        1. -2
          21 December 2015 12: 35
          Quote: Saber
          saber (2) RU Today, 11: 57 ↑

          But did the Apollo launch and watch-cry the wounded Russians or not? 11 don't cry, 12 don't cry ... 17 Yeah! cry! cancel 18, the nose is wiped

          3 flew to master technology. They squeezed out everything they could, therefore, and canceled the last flights.
          Read carefully.
    2. 0
      21 December 2015 14: 25
      .... More interesting, why the Americans canceled flights
      three more Apollo: 18,19 and 20. Although ships and missiles were already built, and crews
      were fully prepared? ...

      .... The goal was achieved .... The USSR finally believed in the "landing" on the moon .... laughing
  47. +6
    21 December 2015 11: 00
    Question!
    In the footage, the Americans set the flag!
    We had a lunar rover there, how many satellites flew and fly, the landing site is known (it seems) why no one says that they saw traces of the Americans and the flag ?.
    There is no atmosphere, no winds either. There should be traces and everything that was left there.
    1. +2
      21 December 2015 11: 50
      Quote: Ruswolf
      We had a lunar rover there, how many satellites flew and fly, the landing site is known (it seems) why no one says that they saw traces of the Americans and the flag ?.
      There is no atmosphere, no winds either. There should be traces and everything that was left there.

      The mattress and Japanese devices have already flown, BUT, the question is that if you have shooting equipment with such parameters that even satellite numbers can be taken from the satellite and notice this in the presence of atmosphere, in images like the Lunar surface, these devices, according to representatives mattresses themselves landing modules no more than 1-1.5 mm, some tracks are guessed (like a thin winding ribbon) of tracks. And this is in the absence of atmosphere !!! And I note that with the development of computers and graphics, this with such quality is also NOT proof !!!!!
      1. +7
        21 December 2015 12: 02
        Quote: Ruswolf
        and flag

        And now carefully look from 2.36 to 2.45 second and you will understand everything !!!
        1. +1
          22 December 2015 00: 05
          damn, the lower corner of the flag is constantly swaying after the astronaut’s passage, and not so much hesitate, indignation of the air masses?
      2. +1
        21 December 2015 15: 37
        for ssla:
        NASA's LRO probe had the most "long-range" camera ever on earth
        for 2011. and he flew in the lowest possible orbit.
        Those. the shots he made are the best you can take on a satellite today.
        However, the shadows on the surface from vertically standing 3 flags are very clear.
        The flag on top is - the object is not visible from above (narrow) - only a clear shadow.
        Nothing like this from natural objects on the moon: stones, rocks, where objects are visible
        and their shadows.

        Japanese and Hindu images of landing sites are much worse in quality.

        Of course, the most correct thing is to send the automatic descent vehicle to the exact same place.
        and take a picture from a distance of "zero".
        By the way, if you compare the shooting of the moon recently made by a Chinese lunar rover with the American 60s
        years - they are very similar in color, lighting, style.
        1. +2
          21 December 2015 19: 06
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Of course, the most correct thing is to send the automatic descent vehicle to the exact same place.
          and take a picture from a distance of "zero".

          I am with you completely "FOR" !!
          And only after that we cover the swords hi
        2. 0
          21 December 2015 21: 10
          Quote: voyaka uh
          By the way, if you compare the shooting of the moon recently made by a Chinese lunar rover with the American 60s
          years - they are very similar in color, lighting, style.

          In the age of computer technology, I watch an ART film and a sense of reality! So what if someone’s pictures are similar to Chinese, this is not proof !!!
  48. +2
    21 December 2015 11: 00
    The answer to the question of where and who shot the “lunar meters” does not refute or prove the fact of the presence of NASA astronauts on the lunar surface, therefore I can not presume to say that they were / were not on the moon. On the one hand, over the past half a century no serious specialist has expressed any doubts about the reality of lunar expeditions. On the other hand, there are a lot of inconsistencies and stocks ... Regardless of this, I think it is necessary to continue to publicly doubt that the Americans really were on the moon, because this is a big blow to national pride. After all, they themselves love to misinterpret, appropriate or deny other people's great achievements, and this is at least bad ...
    1. +4
      21 December 2015 19: 08
      Quote: AlexTires
      On the other hand

      On the other hand, there is NOT ONE evidence that they were there !!!!!!!
  49. +3
    21 December 2015 11: 01
    In general, such doubts initially appeared in 1999. I flew from New York to Moscow for the New Year and bought a magazine at the airport (I don’t remember the name), where the author from the photographs proved that the flight to the moon was a fiction. Nobody spoke about this in Russia at that time; the Americans themselves have long and persistently discussed this issue. So it still stretches.

    Proof is needed. It seems that the lunar satellites of other countries found the equipment of the American expedition on the moon, but how much you can trust them is a question. For all these are "countries of the West".
    If the Americans have not been to the moon, then we urgently need to equip the expedition and take the "palm" into our own hands. Otherwise, the first will be the Chinese.
    Mr. Rogozin, your way out :)
    1. 0
      21 December 2015 19: 10
      Quote: sinoptic
      In Russia, then no one spoke about it

      Then there was no time for this !!! But they spoke
  50. tux
    +8
    21 December 2015 11: 02
    Quote: midashko
    The Americans could not deceive the intelligence of the Soviet Union. Intelligence, radio intelligence and all the rest. Surely the technical services of the USSR accompanied the missiles of the expeditions, direction-finding radio communications, listened, decrypted and did everything possible. It was impossible to imitate everything.


    They could not deceive, but they could make a major concession to the Soviet Union. Moreover, where did all the flight technologies go? Why do neither we nor the Americans fly to the moon anymore? In fairy tales it’s not interesting, there’s no reason, etc. I do not believe. After that, here's another informative reading about Leonov: http://selena-luna.ru/osvoenie-luny/aleksej-leonov-i-nevezhestvennye-lyudi
    1. -7
      21 December 2015 15: 33
      Well, the USSR and Russia did not fly, because the Queen never managed to successfully make a lunar rocket. And the USA just finished the lunar program and decided not to spend money anymore
    2. +2
      21 December 2015 19: 25
      Quote: tux.topwar
      They could not deceive, but to make a major concession to the Soviet Union

      Never say never. Read
      there are only two real lunar modules on Earth - one is in a museum, where no filming has ever been conducted, and it is even forbidden to walk with a camera, and the other is in Hollywood, where, to develop the logic of what is happening on the screen, additional filming of the American landing on the moon was made, " said the Soviet cosmonaut.

      Why was studio photography used?

      Alexei Leonov explained that in order for the viewer to be able to see the development of what is happening from beginning to end on the movie screen, elements of filming are used in any movie.

      "It was impossible, for example, to film the real opening by Neil Armstrong of the hatch of the descent ship on the Moon - there was simply no one to remove it from the surface! For the same reason, it was impossible to film the descent of Armstrong to the Moon along the ladder from the ship. These are the moments that were really taken Kubrick in Hollywood studios to develop the logic of what was happening, and laid the foundation for numerous gossip that the entire landing was allegedly simulated on the set, "explained Alexey Leonov.

      Where the truth begins and the installation ends
      1. +2
        22 December 2015 00: 08
        yeah, and running around the flag from which it sways, although it does not touch, the same dossier?
  51. 0
    21 December 2015 11: 02
    I don't think there's any need to worry about this right now. There were Americans on the moon, and there weren't. Maybe they were, maybe only once out of all the expeditions. The main thing is different: we need to improve our technologies so that the Moon does not remain the only planet that people have visited.
  52. +4
    21 December 2015 11: 03
    I will gladly believe that the US astronauts were on the moon only for the reason that this is an OUTSTANDING achievement, but I can ONLY believe it after I see photographs of the surface of the moon with their lowering vehicles and their mattress on a stick, but for now... . I DO NOT BELIEVE!
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 11: 07
      Quote: mpzss
      I will gladly believe that the US astronauts were on the moon only for the reason that this is an OUTSTANDING achievement, but I can ONLY believe it after I see photographs of the surface of the moon with their lowering vehicles and their mattress on a stick, but for now... . I DO NOT BELIEVE!

      Your right. But the outstanding cosmonaut, twice Hero of the SS Leonov, believes.
      1. +1
        21 December 2015 11: 35
        Quote: enhansment
        Your right. But the outstanding cosmonaut, twice Hero of the SS Leonov, believes.

        Even outstanding people make mistakes. One of the very first cosmonauts (I won’t mention his name because I respect him) was friends with the owner of our plant. I personally saw them entering the Central Department Store (ours, not Moscow). I stopped communicating with him (with the owner) after I found out what kind of salary the workers received.
      2. 0
        21 December 2015 14: 04
        And what can Comrade say? Leonov, if he himself took part in the fake Apollo-Soyuz project? He will swear by his real mother that this is true.
        1. -1
          21 December 2015 21: 55
          Once again about NASA fakes. This year there was information that the members of the Challenger that died in 1986 are mostly alive.
      3. +2
        22 December 2015 16: 47
        Cosmonaut No. 11, twice Hero of the Soviet Union, the first person in the world to go into outer space, said this: “Only a deeply ignorant person can say that the Americans did not land on the Moon.”
  53. +3
    21 December 2015 11: 05
    Maybe once they sat down. But so many times in a row!!! - I’m tormented by cloudy doubts!
    And as for filming, you can’t film a lot and well. You can't make duplicates. Maybe to add shine and charm, the striped ones started filming everything in the pavilions.
    Who knows. everything is cloudy
  54. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 07
    We'll fly sometime and see. Until then it’s all speculation.
  55. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 08
    Zheleznyakov writes that this is not Kubrick at all, in the video (you can read the Green Cat LiveJournal).

    In short, this one "stuffing shit on a fan".

    At the Soviet MCC they watched a video broadcast of the landing on the Moon (the cosmonauts write about it); not a knockoff of a fake Kubrick, but a live broadcast.

    Where did 400 kg of lunar soil come from? Its composition coincided with Soviet soil; What, "Luna-16-20-24" is also a fake?

    Why did they spend 3 billion rubles (which were equal to a dollar, and not 70 to one, as now) on the Soviet N-1 superrocket? to compete with fake Americans?







    Why did they make the Soviet lunar ship? Here he is; no cardboard mockup.



    Where were the KGB looking? They stole the secrets of the atomic bomb, but they couldn’t? The KGB couldn't? belay

    The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter has long photographed landing modules on the Moon and traces of rovers. What are these, mock-ups? How did they get there? Who drew the astronauts' footprints?
    1. +4
      21 December 2015 12: 01
      Has anyone seen these 400 kg of soil? Where did they watch the video feed from? are you proving the flight of the Americans with OUR MISSILES?
      1. +1
        21 December 2015 12: 07
        Here it is, the soil:

        Filmed modern Russian cosmonauts; just now.

        Here: http://zelenyikot.livejournal.com/ everything is described in detail.

        What's this; Are today's cosmonauts lying again, or what?

        We watched from Korolev; Chertok's "Rockets and People" describes everything in detail.

        The question is: WHY should the USSR make a monstrous rocket if the American one is fake?
        Question: WHY did the USSR close the program if there was a chance to expose the amers and get PRIORITY?
        Question: WHY would the Americans make a rocket, each copy of which costs more than 3.000.000.000 in today’s dollars, and then not fly it anywhere.

        I really don’t like amers, but, unfortunately, I’m not ready to absorb Kubrick’s obvious lies.
        1. +3
          21 December 2015 14: 12
          Quote: Gormengast
          The question is: WHY should the USSR make a monstrous rocket if the American one is fake?

          To fly to the moon! And if the Americans failed to fly to the moon, this does not mean that their rocket is fake!
          Quote: Gormengast
          Question: WHY did the USSR close the program if there was a chance to expose the amers and get PRIORITY?

          Firstly, they believed that the Americans really flew to the moon. Secondly, it is technically so difficult and expensive that they decided to close this program. This is another argument that the Americans have not been to the moon! After all, they were 10 years behind the USSR in space, and now it’s kvass!
          Question: WHY would the Americans make a rocket, each copy of which costs more than 3.000.000.000 in today’s dollars, and then not fly it anywhere.

          It didn’t work out that way and we didn’t fly! And that’s how they wanted it, that’s how they wanted it!)) Kubrick even made the film!
    2. +3
      21 December 2015 14: 03
      Why are you showing photographs of Soviet missiles? They just weren’t on the moon! Do you want to say that since our rockets weren’t on the moon, that means the American ones definitely were?
      1. 0
        21 December 2015 14: 13
        Ours made monster rockets because believed that the amers had real ones. Those politicians believed was closer in time and had incomparable intelligence data (as opposed to site readers).

        Otherwise they wouldn't make any rockets; there would be no need to.

        This Soyuz is essentially an R-7 ICBM; made for war.
        And the Proton is essentially an UR-500 ICBM; made for war.

        But the N-1 did not have any military prototype; it is purely for the Moon. So, were Khrushchev and Brezhnev fools? Did the Americans screw them over? Fooled by cardboard rockets and wooden ships?
    3. +1
      April 4 2018 18: 46
      Do you have any idea what 400 kg of lunar soil is? Even in mass terms, the question is what is the density of lunar soil?

      Example 400 kg. 1st grade wheat it will be equal to 8 bags of 50 kilograms, have you ever tried to carry such heavy weights in your life, if you carried it you should understand how much weight it is, I carried it in the village at my aunt’s and for me, a city boy, it was not at all ice. Why didn’t I notice on the moon (during the shooting) 2 eccentrics in spacesuits roaming around with trunks
      or the feelers of the lunar soil laughing lol request It had to be brought 8 times 50 kg each belay , and now try to dig up lunar soil in a rigid spacesuit and another 50 kilos for two. Moreover, drive the rover and other nonsense with a limited amount of oxygen or was the oxygen recharged from batteries? laughing . And how much space will this trunk take up in the module? Even in the feature film, Korolev told Leonov that such a spacesuit would need at least 10 years to appear. Americans still fly to the ISS on our ships and climb into outer space only in our EAGLES tongue hi
  56. +2
    21 December 2015 11: 08
    Yes, the Americans flew to the Moon, no matter how much I didn’t want it all to be a set-up, but... can you even imagine what forces and means were used all over the world to track this flight... that’s why they stopped this program... This is where questions really arise...
    1. +2
      21 December 2015 11: 15
      Quote: Bosk
      Yes, the Americans flew to the Moon, no matter how much I didn’t want it all to be a set-up, but... can you even imagine what forces and means were used all over the world to track this flight... that’s why they stopped this program... This is where questions really arise...

      They flew and flew in their films. laughing
  57. +2
    21 December 2015 11: 09
    Quote: Serpent AAA
    the director “was afraid of being killed by American intelligence services, following the example of other participants in the television support of the US lunar scam.”


    Something reminds me of the American film "Capricorn-1"
  58. +4
    21 December 2015 11: 10
    Even if the interview is genuine, it doesn't change anything. Kubrick really could have made something for NASA. This does not deny the flight to the Moon. The famous shots with Gagarin about “let’s go” are also staged. Anyone who has been to the cosmonautics museum and seen the Vostok spacecraft will understand why. There was simply nowhere to put a movie camera of those years (the size of a couple of suitcases) there.

    The same goes for the Moon. All landing and walking scenes were filmed for the masses in Hollywood. Nobody really hides this.
  59. +3
    21 December 2015 11: 12
    By the way, why is no one talking about the live broadcast, which was monitored by ALL countries that have the slightest radio intelligence. Or is the video signal from the surface of the Moon also a fake?
  60. 0
    21 December 2015 11: 14
    The fact that they were filming on the ground is for sure (duplicated), but whether they were there or not, that is the question!!!
  61. 0
    21 December 2015 11: 18
    For some reason I'm not surprised by this news. Americans are a nation of liars and spin doctors.
  62. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 19
    Quote: ohtsistem
    It’s necessary for so many years that everyone’s brains were powdered ... no words

    You know that Comrade Stalin’s speech at the parade in Moscow (November 1941) was filmed in the pavilion and then edited. BUT THIS DOESN’T MEAN THAT STALIN WAS NOT ON THE TRIBUNE OF THE MAUSOLEUM, there was both Stalin and the parade!!!
    At the time of the American expeditions to the moon, the COLD WAR was going on. Can you imagine what trump card the Americans are giving into the hands of the USSR if they decided to stage it. Foreign intelligence, the KGB, the GRU, all the technical means of the USSR were aimed at finding evidence. As a result, the USSR leadership CONGRATULATED the US leadership on victory. WHAT ARE YOU SMARTER THAN THE LEADERS OF THE USSR? Yes hiRS - yes, some fragments were filmed on the ground, I agree.
    1. 0
      23 December 2015 20: 11
      Cold war you say. Yes, after Stalin, they only dreamed of how to surrender at a higher price - thaw, détente, perestroika. Forgot? Garage of Brezhnev's foreign cars. All the children of the Politburo are over the hill.
  63. -2
    21 December 2015 11: 20
    When “journalists” have absolutely nothing to do, they lick the US lunar program.

    fool
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 12: 25
      The number of minuses will not change anything in this world.
      Just read less of the yellow press.
      It’s a pity that at VO, instead of serious analytics, outright blizzards are increasingly appearing, further zombifying unprepared psychologically citizens.
      lol smile
      1. 0
        23 December 2015 20: 12
        You have to think. Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look - there is a puncture on a puncture: the descent module is shiny, i.e. was not burned upon re-entry, but was simply thrown from the plane. Astronauts d.b. after the flight, having fallen into the earth’s gravity, they lie down, but they don’t care, they just smile embarrassedly. And yes, according to NASA, they wore diapers all their days; That's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for the crime against the American people of cutting away 20 billion dollars.
  64. -1
    21 December 2015 11: 21
    They were, they weren’t... some kind of nonsense.
    Even if they weren’t, the good thing is that they had the impudence and technical capabilities to fool the whole world.
    Buy and outbid those who knew the truth.
    To wipe the eyes of those who did not know the truth.
    And make a magnificent...fake, or not...I don’t know.
    ...
    Be that as it may, the very fact of operating our devices, remotely controlled - and crazy manned flights (every single one of them was successful, which is already alarming) -
    speaks in favor of the prudence of planners and the genius of engineering developers.
    Speaks in our favor!
    ...
    And there were more of our devices than American ones. And not only on the Moon.
    Apparently, something didn’t work out for the Americans, they just had to put people in capsules.
    And we were also accused of disregarding people's lives.
    ...
    I wonder why suddenly at that time, the 70s, EVERYONE suddenly cooled down to space and underwater research. We are Americans, French, Italians.
    Apparently, the nanoplanets on the Moon did not like visiting the rowdy Americans.
    Well, so be it.
  65. 0
    21 December 2015 11: 22
    Hollywood is not just a film factory, but a political instrument. When Obama was appointed for the second time, he announced a flight to Mars. This epic is also being filmed in Hollywood.
    I don’t believe that in those years there were technologies that made it possible to successfully land on the Moon and return several times. However, the goal has been achieved: technologies supposedly “for a flight to the Moon” have been created and brought to implementation at the expense of taxpayers in the United States and the whole world. The US government (administration) obliged all TNCs registered in the US to buy them out and put them into production. The USSR has been destroyed, the world is being formatted in the interests of the global leadership of several hundred TNCs. Today the USA is a leading technological power, a hegemon. The production of products that do not meet the mandatory standards introduced by the US administration is prohibited - this is monitored by the WTO.
    Without the “flight to the moon” these goals would not have been achieved.
    Now the "attack on the United States" of September 11, 2001 may be exposed.
    1. 0
      23 December 2015 20: 14
      I advise everyone to dial “Dmitry Khalezov.” Here is the real explanation of all the inconsistencies in the demolition of the twin towers. This is an explosion of nuclear charges planted before construction.
  66. +2
    21 December 2015 11: 22
    Quote: Gorinich
    If such information began to emerge, it means that the world behind the scenes decided to put an end to the United States.
    We are waiting for new throws on the twin towers ...


    Yes, from the very beginning there is something to complain about... remember the footage - from all sides and from all angles of falling buildings, crashing planes, columns of dust on people, etc. Isn't it very beautiful? No. Well, how our plane was shot down was also shown from all angles! am Here too, it feels like the operators knew that something would happen! belay Or did such super footage come strictly from surveillance cameras from buildings? I do not believe. No. After stealing our footage of bombings in Syria and passing them off as our own, I don’t believe it! No. Now remember, where are the same shots of the “killer plane flying towards the Pentagon building”??? what then its collapse or at least all sorts of damage from all angles? for some reason there’s no...even no footage of the plane’s wreckage! request And then many Americans immediately said that this was a pure setup with these buildings, that whoever was needed from among the people was warned, everyone was warned, the rest were stupidly sacrificed! crying So wherever you look, it’s all Hollywood and the IS footage is very reminiscent of Hollywood, beautiful with songs.. negative am
  67. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 23
    The word of the Americans is so cheap that the “stolen” almost 400 kg of lunar soil and the “missing” original films will outweigh thousands and thousands of attempts to justify themselves. All attempts to discredit skeptics, one way or another, always come down to ridicule and debunking their claims about the flag, footprints, the direction of shadows in photographs, the absence of stars and a few other minor facts, but never touch upon the many hundreds of technical aspects that are given in the detailed studies of the skeptics. Such techniques are designed for the primary emotional perception of the average person, who usually does not look beyond the title of the article or, at best, the abstract. Questions, questions, questions... and so far no sane answers.
  68. -2
    21 December 2015 11: 24
    Interesting: will personal (I’m sure) pensioner Armstrong still receive his pension?)))
    1. +7
      21 December 2015 12: 19
      Quote: RUSOIVAN
      Interesting: will personal (I’m sure) pensioner Armstrong still receive his pension?)))

      Well, stupid! Armstrong died: August 25, 2012 (age 82)!!!
      Stop drinking, at least read the newspapers!!!
      1. +1
        21 December 2015 13: 58
        Yes, the Yankees flew, they flew. I even have a video hi
  69. 0
    21 December 2015 11: 25
    Everything is unclear... NO official statement! Neither from PUTIN nor from the USA! so there is a lot of darkness in this topic!
  70. +5
    21 December 2015 11: 28
    Quote: Gormengast
    Where did 400 kg of lunar soil come from?
    ?????? Do you even understand what 400 kg is for a spacecraft?
    1. -2
      21 December 2015 12: 21
      That's exactly what I understand. Therefore, there are 382 kg of Amer soil; and about 100 grams for Luna-16, about 50 grams for Luna-20 and 140 grams for Luna-24 (the drill there was longer; stroke 2400 mm; depth for inclined drilling 2000 mm).

      To lift 400 kg, heavy manned vehicles are needed.
      1. -2
        21 December 2015 13: 17
        Quote: Gormengast
        To lift 400 kg, heavy manned vehicles are needed.

        Not at once, but all!!!
        How much lunar soil did the Americans bring...

        Apollo 11 - 21,55 kg
        Apollo 12 - 34,35 kg
        Apollo 14 - 42,28 kg
        Apollo 15 - 77,31 kg
        Apollo 16 - 95,71 kg
        Apollo 17 - 110,52 kg
        Total: 381,72 kg.
        1. 0
          21 December 2015 14: 22
          Naturally everything; Now everything (that is not distributed around the world) is stored in one place.

          This doesn't change the essence. AMC can bring 100 grams; a manned ship (at a minimum) is 200 times larger.

          This fact alone proves that the vehicles that brought soil were heavy, which is characteristic of manned vehicles, and not automatic ones. At the same time, the soil has different composition; it was collected up to a distance of 8 km from the landing module.

          If you believe the refutors, then:

          1. For some reason the Americans created a giant automatic device; For analysis we need grams, not kilograms.
          2. The Americans created an automatic “collector” of soil, which drove around the device, at a great distance, and collected soil (which was simply impossible to create in the 60s).

          And all this just to stroke Kubrick's ego?
          1. 0
            21 December 2015 15: 49
            all this is great, but no one has seen these 400 kg. you can take Soviet lunar soil for research, but you cannot take American...
            1. -2
              21 December 2015 17: 52
              Yes, because all this soil has long been stolen as a curiosity - in the form of gifts and souvenirs by the US government and NASA.
              1. 0
                22 December 2015 12: 18
                NOBODY has seen this soil. There are pieces, literally grams, that NEVER left America, and RESEARCH of the soil was done only in American laboratories. There are publications on this topic on the Internet. Scientists from other countries were sent REPORTS on research, which they included in their work.
                Where is the soil? “Lost” is the official position.
                Those grams that the Americans have are PRESUMABLY lunar soil, because... these may be meteorites classified as lunar. Why? Because “lunar” meteorites are found all over the Earth, but they are not found at all in the United States! And in Antarctica, the “lunar” meteorites found by the Americans ended up in the same center in which stones from the Moon were then stored. Those. they were kept "together". For what?
  71. -1
    21 December 2015 11: 30
    So, how will America wash itself away from this embarrassment, if not shame?
  72. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 35
    AND THE RADIATION BELT?
  73. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 37
    Mattress people love to lie and distort any facts.
  74. 0
    21 December 2015 11: 38
    An old myth.
  75. +2
    21 December 2015 11: 40
    All states are pure Hollywood, and nothing can be done about it.
  76. 0
    21 December 2015 11: 40
    They talked about this before (10-15 years ago). And from time to time some facts emerge again. I watched the video. Has anyone compared it to the original? Kubrick admitted during his lifetime that he filmed several episodes in the studio, so to speak, for “historical accuracy.” And he even indicated which ones specifically. So, there is nothing to be surprised about. And the fact that Americans lie all the time, well, they always do that.
  77. -2
    21 December 2015 11: 42
    For a long time they showed on TV how and what was edited for this film, what special effects were used, etc. and so on. This film (American landing on the moon) was created on earth! Why was this article posted here?! winked I just can't understand what So I’m asking this question, what is the purpose of this? belay article??
  78. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 43
    That’s why we doubt the credibility that these mattress makers are capable of lying in the name of supremacy throughout the world. They consider themselves to be in charge at any cost, including lying.
  79. +3
    21 December 2015 11: 43
    This is how you need to be able to cut 30 lard. dollars.
    And we are all “corruption in Russia, corruption in Russia.”
    “Study, study and study again..”©
  80. 0
    21 December 2015 11: 47
    Be that as it may, but people who have been involved in space topics all their lives answered my question (to two doctors of science) were the Americans still on the Moon or not? They answer that they personally, as well as our scientific community, have no doubts - yes, the Americans were still on the Moon.
    Ps: but the story is still murky - no one has been flying to the moon for too long.
  81. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 49
    Quote: _Vladislav_
    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.


    You're laughing? The current system of government in our state is not capable of solving such problems.
    1. 0
      21 December 2015 21: 23
      It’s even more banal: ours visited the moon with a lunar rover, the Americans visited it alive, the “sports” events are over. Neither Russia nor the United States, simply for the sake of sport, will fly there anymore. Building something stationary there costs a huge amount of money, which is not affordable in terms of volume either for the USA, or, especially, for Russia. There are no super-space projects as such.
  82. 0
    21 December 2015 11: 50
    Yuri Ignatievich Mukhin APPROVES)))))
  83. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 52
    The second, the outer radiation belt, discovered by Soviet scientists, is located at altitudes from 9000 to 45000 km. It is much wider than the inner one (extending 50° north and 50° south of the equator) and also has variable intensity. The maximum dose created by the outer belt in one hour can be enormous - up to 10000 roentgens. However, the problem of protection from radiation of the outer belt will, in all likelihood, be less complex than the problem of protection from radiation of the inner belt. The fact is that the outer belt consists mainly of particles of relatively low energy - electrons, from which even ordinary cladding materials of a spacecraft can protect well. If you use fairly thin lead screens, then this dose can be reduced thousands and tens of thousands of times.
    http://bolshoyforum.com/wiki/
  84. +1
    21 December 2015 11: 54
    In the lunar scam of the United States put a bullet!

    NASA and HOLLYWOOD are twin brothers. wink laughing
  85. +4
    21 December 2015 11: 56
    I read Mukhin's "USA Moon Scam"... From my point of view, it is quite convincing.
    Something can explain the fluttering of the flag. Something can justify other inconsistencies.
    But in “flights to the Moon” there are so many inconsistencies, inconsistencies and contradictions that their quantity is already turning into quality.
    To resolve contradictions and inconsistencies, you can pile up a bunch of explanations, but here’s the problem: a specific inconsistency has been explained, but the explanation for the inconsistency, in turn, does not fit in with the explanation of another.
    But if we take as an assumption that the “moon landing” is a falsification, then with this single assumption everything falls into place...

    Someone cites the opinion of OUR cosmonauts in defense of the Americans. Not an argument!!! Cosmonauts, of course, are authoritative people, but...
    1) Not everyone had access to reliable information. And they received their “knowledge” through official channels.
    2) Those who had access to reliable information were ORDERED not to open their mouths, but to lay out the official version for “external” use. In the USSR, the protection of secrets was very well organized. And one could easily lose EVERYTHING (honor, material wealth, etc.) by blurting out SOMETHING.
  86. -3
    21 December 2015 12: 00
    There is no doubt that the Americans flew to the moon. And the ships landed and the modules returned.
    But there are several questions that defy logical explanation:
    - why is such a powerful carrier not used anymore? He could also serve any space program, including military;
    - where did the lunar soil go? If my memory serves me correctly, ours brought the first (and not the first) soil samples and, literally, gram by gram, distributed them to the countries of the world for research, including the USA.

    The films could burn, ......, but where did the soil go? Several hundred kilograms of it were brought there.

    And what is being talked about now is a conversation specifically about the falsification of filming of episodes of man landing on the moon.
    Something like this ...
    1. 0
      21 December 2015 14: 27
      Why is such a powerful carrier not used anymore?


      does not fit NASA's modern budget. It was 4,5% of GDP: 0,5% remains. One rocket costs more than $3 billion. This is without a ship.

      Where did the lunar soil go?


      He's there. In the English-language sector of the network, you can easily find each stone - where it is located (if not in storage in the USA). The largest cobblestone is more than 10 kg.
    2. 0
      23 December 2015 20: 18
      The fact that they didn’t fly to the moon, but falsified it, also leaves no doubt. Thanks to the opus for the video. I advise you to look - there is a puncture on a puncture: the descent module is shiny, i.e. was not burned upon re-entry, but was simply thrown from the plane. Astronauts d.b. after the flight, having fallen into the earth’s gravity, they lie down, but they don’t care, they just smile embarrassedly. And yes, after all, according to NASA, they wore diapers all their days; That's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for the crime against the American people of cutting away 20 billion dollars.
  87. -1
    21 December 2015 12: 00
    Many people think that Americans actually landed on the moon, but this is understandable; we have been told about their American dream for many decades and we believe. So those who are weak in conviction and easily succumb to various deceptions and tricks are the ones who believe in the US lunar program. The USSR, or rather the rulers, were not very good at being second in anything and therefore they immediately canceled their program. I studied the US lunar program very well and there are a lot of moments where even a child could understand that they were not able to fly in that particular period of time. It took about 1 - 1,5 more years for full implementation and testing, and then suddenly there was not even a 20% guarantee that the lunar module would be able to fly back with astronauts and return them guaranteed. Otherwise it would be a complete failure for the entire lunar program. The money allocated, naturally, was packaged into the pockets of famous people. For the leaders of the Union, only a video from the “moon”, or rather from a film set, was enough and the desire for flights disappeared, which is what the Americans were counting on.
    The most interesting thing will be when Russia or China lands on the surface of our satellite and everyone will see the difference between the US footage and real footage. Although I do not claim that the Director is telling the truth.
  88. +4
    21 December 2015 12: 01
    Quote: Gorinich
    If such information began to emerge, it means that the world behind the scenes decided to put an end to the United States.
    We are waiting for new throws on the twin towers ...

    Indeed, let them tell you how two planes were brought down three building)))
    1. -1
      21 December 2015 12: 11
      Quote: Gunter
      Indeed, let them tell you how two planes brought down three buildings)))

      It wasn't just the Twin Towers that were damaged. Five more buildings were either destroyed or heavily damaged. A total of 25 buildings were damaged, and 7 had to be demolished. - Read more on FB.ru: http://fb.ru/article/55371/bashni-bliznetsyi-tragediya-sentyabrya
  89. -2
    21 December 2015 12: 05
    HA, HA, HA 100% proof - the module is on the moon. There was editing, 100% Perhaps later they launched the crew to the moon, but it was a deception :-)
  90. +2
    21 December 2015 12: 08
    It’s simply amazing! Or are our people really so poorly educated, or do all the dead ends flock here like flies to shit? And what’s interesting is that no one doubted the authenticity of some stupid “Kubrick’s will”! request
    1. +1
      21 December 2015 14: 30
      Specialist Alexander Borisovich Zheleznyakov doubted http://zelenyikot.livejournal.com/83385.html

      This is not Kubrick at all; Kubrick had no moles on his cheeks, no moles on his eyebrows, and other beard lines.
      1. 0
        21 December 2015 15: 39
        The video shows a completely different person, but definitely not Kubrick.
    2. +1
      21 December 2015 15: 37
      Our people are stupid, because they allow all sorts of Shirlotans to beautifully hang noodles on their ears and believe in this noodles, like this garbage about the imaginary landing on the moon.
  91. -1
    21 December 2015 12: 10
    .. maybe, maybe..
    However, there is also evidence that they were there... - all sorts of radio interceptions... and so on...
    1. 0
      23 December 2015 20: 20
      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.
  92. 0
    21 December 2015 12: 12
    Rocket launch from Earth...no question, flyby of the Moon...no question, module landing...no question, soil collection...no question, flag planting...no question, takeoff from the Moon...no question , was there a person there... that is the question!!! Although... some kind of muddy story!!!
  93. 0
    21 December 2015 12: 26
    However, only now, after the direct confessions of Stanley Kubrick himself, an internationally recognized Hollywood master of directing, has a final and final point been made in the American lunar offer.

    Another nonsense! I TRUST Leonov! And not to the director who could say that he is actually Jesus Christ...
    1. +2
      21 December 2015 13: 54
      You can trust Leonov. Faith is a religious category. And often faith is based on FALSE premises. At one time, people sincerely believed that the Earth was flat. Well? Should I continue about faith?
      I repeat: Leonov is a military man; it was ordered to assume that the Americans landed on the Moon, it will be assumed... If you loosen your tongue, you will receive reprisals; they will not be sent into exile or imprisoned, but they will be excommunicated from the blessings of life (honestly earned by the hump!!!). And you will be a person with a past that everyone will forget about very soon. Is he mentally ill? No. If he knew anything, he behaved CORRECTLY. And he sat in a good position for a long time and flew into space again and lived in honor and respect.
      And also about the loosening of the tongue. Where would Leonov dump the truth? On the pages of the Soviet press? Not funny. In a tyrnet that didn’t exist? Foreign correspondents? Well, yes, they are now on every corner, but during It, a foreign person was a rare fruit and under the close tutelage of a certain office. Just for attempting unauthorized contact with imported people, an ordinary person could get into a lot of trouble, but there is no need to talk about a person of Leonov’s level. Incl. With whom could Leonov (and not only Leonov, but also others in the know) share information? With my wife or with colleagues who were already in the know.

      Let's move on. Let's assume that nothing was filmed about the American landing at all, and that cameras and cameras were not invented. But in addition to photos and film bloopers, mattress covers have a cartload of inconsistencies in various technical and not only technical aspects. And somehow there are no intelligible explanations for them. We’ll leave rockets, technology (40 years ago, but not now) and other technical wisdom behind the scenes. Where is the documentary evidence of the American “triumph”? Filming allegedly took place on the Moon. Issue it for an independent international examination and that’s the end of it! But they are not there.... “lost”... Children lie even more believably.
  94. +2
    21 December 2015 12: 26
    Once upon a time, there was a consultant at VO. A certain Oleg Sokolov. With the nickname “professor” and an avatar ... with his tongue sticking out. Now this “professor” would furiously attack those who doubted. He would write out a devastating article. After all, for those like him" prohessors "USSR-Scoop-nothing, America-everything. Where is this consultant. Hiding in the wilds of Israel.
    1. 0
      21 December 2015 21: 19
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXdeEEFiTW0
  95. +2
    21 December 2015 12: 31


    Challenger is the proper name for the Apollo 17 lander.
    Flag - it’s clear what it is.
    LRV is a lunar rover; the place of his last stop.
    ALSEP and SEP are sites where scientific instruments are installed.

    The black lines are travel routes. Who drew this?

    And who knows that now, using the crowdfunding system, funds are being raised for the construction and launch of a private lunar satellite to film the landing sites of stations and ships on the Moon?
    1. -1
      22 December 2015 12: 34
      The development team includes Russian engineers, programmers and physicists. Part of the team consists of specialists from the Russian private space company Dauria Aerospace, and part are engineers who have not previously been involved in space projects, but decided to try themselves in this direction.
      The satellite will search for and photograph various landers - Apollo and Lunokhod - and also photograph the Moon in high resolution. The satellite is planned to be sent into space as a co-launch with lunar missions from Russia, India or China in the next ten years.
      What will the “doubters” sing then? Most likely the old song - “sold out”, “liberals”, “fake”.... smile
  96. 0
    21 December 2015 12: 34
    Quote: Bayonet
    Quote: Gunter
    Indeed, let them tell you how two planes brought down three buildings)))

    It wasn't just the Twin Towers that were damaged. Five more buildings were either destroyed or heavily damaged. A total of 25 buildings were damaged, and 7 had to be demolished. - Read more on FB.ru: http://fb.ru/article/55371/bashni-bliznetsyi-tragediya-sentyabrya

    I read it - the article is nothing, if you want to get a real idea, read V. Friedman’s “A View to a Kill” and Thierry Meyssan’s “September 11, 2011”.
  97. +1
    21 December 2015 13: 00
    As a child and teenager, I simply read books by Isaac Asimov, Ray Bradbury and others. Arkady and Boris Strugatsky are generally my favorite writers. Therefore, I don’t care who the people who landed on the Moon were, the main thing is that they were Earthlings. And what worries me more is not whether the Americans were on the Moon, but the fact that a person still cannot fly there and look with his own eyes at the lunar modules, all-terrain vehicles and the very traces of the astronauts, like an ordinary tourist. Instead, humanity is mired in religious wars and the struggle of all against all.
    1. 0
      23 December 2015 12: 56
      Quote: Bjorn
      humanity is mired in religious wars
      - Yes? And I thought they were fighting over oil and gas... laughing
    2. 0
      23 December 2015 20: 23
      There is no need to be noble in front of scoundrels. Thanks opus for the video. I advise you to look - there is a puncture on a puncture: the descent module is shiny, i.e. was not burned upon re-entry, but was simply thrown from the plane. Astronauts d.b. after the flight, having fallen into the earth’s gravity, they lie down, but they don’t care, they just smile embarrassedly. And yes, after all, according to NASA, they wore diapers all their days; That's a little embarrassing. But only for this, and not for the crime against the American people of cutting away 20 billion dollars.
  98. +2
    21 December 2015 13: 06
    No need to argue. We need to fly to the moon and declare primacy. Then let the Americans themselves prove that they really were there!
    If they had actually been to the Moon, now dozens of them involved in the flight would be shouting about their readiness to take a polygraph test.
    1. +3
      21 December 2015 13: 16
      They will fly to the Moon, but again it’s not us, but the United States, on our super-heavy rocket SLS we curtailed our program for building a super-heavy rocket, with Roscosmos you can safely curtail all programs.
  99. +5
    21 December 2015 13: 34
    An interesting analysis by Yu. Mukhin, orally youtube.com›watch?v=_25i8EF5nFk and his book on this topic - “USA Moon Scam. Yuri Mukhin. Maximum of lies and stupidity.” Very interesting and well-reasoned.
  100. +2
    21 December 2015 13: 47
    In my opinion, this is still the biggest scam, and not an achievement of humanity))) Well, there are too many questions... The developments of this supposed program were not used in the future. The program itself, judging by NASA's further achievements, had a number of omissions. Can you imagine at that time, with that level of technology development, it was necessary to launch a ship from the lunar surface with a limited amount of fuel for only one attempt, then dock with an orbital ship and all together fly into earth orbit and land,,,, and this all without preliminary training launches, without real test flights??? Well, it’s hard for me to believe in all this... Well, and about the little things... No one saw the docking module. and during the flight with Apollo - we designed it..))) Saturn was not used in the future - which is very strange, and it is strange that its design developments were not used))) I think that there were flights, but they created precisely the appearance of these flights with the crew... And this is not at all because I don’t want to recognize NASA’s primacy in this matter, but because this whole story is murky)))
    1. 0
      13 February 2018 22: 19
      Amstrong supposedly flew into space on Gemeni, before the “flight to the moon,” and there he had the entire flight, right in front of his lying Pindo face, a glass window through which he could observe the cosmic sky, without an atmosphere, until he was blue in the face. But even there he did not see what stars look like in space.
      He not only deceived the Americans, he tried to deceive the whole world. A false movie from the pavilion is not a huge step for humanity, it is just a false movie from the pavilion. And Armstrong is a liar forever. He will be written down in the history of the Earth, like Judas. They've been keeping the secret for half a century, well, for another half a century politicians will chew snot and say that the United States was on the moon. And then they will definitely cover both Amstrong and the Pindos behind him with shame. For now, this is a political issue, the United States considers itself the number one race, and so far politicians have no goal of poking Pindos in their own feces. The European Union is under America, Japan is under America, China is tactful, although it has reined in the United States with its “Jade Hare,” and Russia does not have the money to fly to the Moon. Until then, the United States will “be on the moon.”