Fear_and_Loathing: bingethinker: we're coming up on the 40th anniversary of this being old news.

Get off my lawn!

Watched the landing on T.V., in Omaha Nebraska with a bulldog named Orey. Black and white T.V. and late. It was the day we arrived at S.A.C.. Oh, and there was a "Police Action" going on and the Cold War was pretty hot.

It was pretty much the height of American achievement, well except for maybe the first shuttle flight.

Yes, way late. I saw the first shuttle launch but was way late for the Apollo missions. Both have failed in my eyes because we didn't follow up. Von Braun was man we should have listened to him.

portscanner: I thought this was what the Ruskies sent to the moon:

/ obscure?

and it was already obliquely mentioned around 08:45:50 PM...

bingethinker: Hey Subby, we're coming up on the 40th anniversary of this being old news.

Subby is possibly below the age of 30. That age group's collective historical knowledge goes back only 7 years or so.

Therion: Okay, never mind, got it -



Also found a nice collection of some relatively obscure pics from the US space program -
http://americanpicturelinks.com/Moon.htm (new window)


Does this look slightly steam punk to anyone else?

Do they give the Nobel prize for attempted chemistry?

eqtworld: Delawheredad: For a real interesting take on the space race check out the 1968 movie "Countdown" Filmed in 1967 it shows how the moon could have been reached with a modified GEMINI capsule. If you sent one guy one way. NASA seriously considered every idea in this movie because they were afraid that the Russians could beat them even at this late a date.

what?

How would that be a win?

No doubt , if you want a carbon splash point that's all good but the race was to land people on the moon and bring them back.

Shrew2u: Proving once again that the Soviet's Germans weren't as good as our Germans.

/wait, wut?

Just a few of the guys that take exception,

eqtworld [TotalFark]

The idea is that before the Gemini went to the moon a survival station of some sort would land a few days ahead of the Gemini capsule and the lone astronaut would wait in this station until Apollo was ready and the first Apollo mission would have rescued the first man in the moon. Its a completely batty idea but NASA actually thought about doing it. The lone astronaut on the moon would have been stranded anywhere from a few months to a year!

Here are some real plans NASA also considered. One of these plans would have put a man on the moon as early as 1966.

Link

Flogster: "I say, this has really been drama of the highest order."

So why the hell were the Brits there?!

eqtworld: Shrew2u: Proving once again that the Soviet's Germans weren't as good as our Germans.

They were just as good, they put the first satellite in orbit, the first man, and landed more and better robots on the moon than we did.

They just didn't have the money to throw at it that we did. They could have sent a man to the moon (maybe a few years after us, but still it would have been well within their ability )

They did not do it because it was expensive and in their view, kind of pointless; because with state controlled newspapers they could get as much propaganda from being the first in the areas I listed previously as we got from going to the moon. We were getting our asses kicked in the space race, that's why we did it.

Also, many of their engineers thought it was too dangerous and that we were crazy for trying a manned landing.

To this day, the Russians have spent more man hours in space than we have, with less fatalities per man hour.

Most of this is true. Except they had a serious problem with large lifter capacity. Getting to the moon with a human lander and returning eluded them.

If they could have done it, of course they would have done it. You go because you can, even if you don't win the race. You go because you have allies who want to see you are good enough as well.

The heavy launcher equivalent for the Saturn V just wasn't there.

Their Germans weren't better, we had the real deal. Wernher von Braun and his team. Who provided what the Russians couldn't achieve, a moon rocket. Indeed they weren't even close, the N1 was a complete junk rocket.

A voice is later heard saying: "I say, this has really been drama of the highest order."

Neville! Language!

Ashtrey: Flogster: "I say, this has really been drama of the highest order."

So why the hell were the Brits there?!

TFA is about a recording for an observatory in Cheshire. I think it's great that English people really talk that way.

Here is the Recording [MP3]

Ashtrey: Flogster: "I say, this has really been drama of the highest order."

So why the hell were the Brits there?!

They were ronery and wanted some attention. Same reason they wrote the article like this is breaking news.

Geeze guys, you're a bunch of spoil sports. I finished reading that article convinced that there were corpses on the moon.

RUSSIAN CORPSES ON THE MOON

How cool would that be?

wjllope: You are *all* drinking the same stupid kool-aid!



The pictures taken from the surface show shadows on the surface pointing in different directions. These *prove* that a photoshop-like program generated these pictures!


This effect is an optical illusion. Backlighting can generate pretty weird effects at times. And in some of the shots, you literally DID have multiple sources of lighting... the lighting on the lander, and the sun's reflections off the greyish-white lunar soil. It makes for a pretty good reflection actually (also explains the shots where the 'shadows' were lit up).


and there were no STARS in any of these pictures! With the moon's lack of atmosphere how can this possibly be?!?



Short exposure snapshots. The sun is BRIGHT on the lit side of the moon, and all of the Apollo missions landed on the lit side of the moon. If we'd kept the camera aperture open long enough to capture stars, then everything else in the picture would have been washed out with overexposure (probably including the stars themselves).


and some pictures taken miles apart have the same backgrounds. That's just lazy.


The moon is not the earth. Without atmospheric distortions and haze to give us a sense of distance, our brains can't really tell distance all that well. Some of those 'same backgrounds' are just really similar looking lunar vistas. Others were literally the same section of background, taken at different times because something interesting was in the foreground.


so, go ahead and get distracted by the Russian angle. That's just what *they* want!


Idiot.

Everyone knows the Russian spacecraft was knocked ever so slightly out of it's precise path to the moon when Chuck Norris roundhouse kicked a child into orbit.

xellas84: Idiot.

Rotsky-esque.

USA! USA! We won!

Max Awesome: Geeze guys, you're a bunch of spoil sports. I finished reading that article convinced that there were corpses on the moon.

RUSSIAN CORPSES ON THE MOON

How cool would that be?

I remember reading article somewhere that Soviets secretly sent man/men on suicide mission to the Moon to take care of Lunokhod{s} because they wanted to show how good their radio and robotic technology is.

brukmann: 12349876: Linux_Yes: Crashing doesn't count.

Unmanned is a very different story than manned. the difficulty is MUCH higher with manned missions. and MUCH more expensive too.

and nobody minds losing a few bits of metal.


DISASSEMBLE = DEAD?!

/begs to differ
//hot like a SAINT's laser

Hmm new fav. thanks for being awesome.

Aww yes the moon landing. Another historical event that was in hindsight not that significant, not that interesting, cost too much, and was really just one big propoganda campaign.

arkansas: This is a very ignorant article. Luna 15 is well known. In addition, it was UNMANNED so it was ZERO competition to Apollo 11 even at the time. Even if it had landed successfully Apollo 11 would STILL have been the first manned moon landing. The two missions are not even comparable, and not even the Soviets would have tried to pass off Luna 15 as a competition with Apollo 11.

It was an attempt to return lunar soil to earth and that is all it was.

Actually, it was an attempt (desperate last ditch) to upstage the Apollo mission.

Delawheredad: The main reason Apollo 8 was sent around the moon was because NASA even in 1968 was afraid that they were behind the Soviets. Apollo 8 effectively ended the space race.

There never was a race. The Americans were always way in front technologically. The only reason the Americans didn't launch a man into space first was that they had much more advanced an lighter nukes, so their balistic missiles were not capable of carrying a man into space.

The Russians on the other hand had off the shelf ballistic missiles capable of carrying a man into space.

But look at the N1 rocket. I forget the exact number, but they had seven launches and seven failures. There was no way that kind of engineering was going to send someone to the moon.

bbfreak: Their Germans weren't better, we had the real deal. Wernher von Braun and his team. Who provided what the Russians couldn't achieve, a moon rocket. Indeed they weren't even close, the N1 was a complete junk rocket.

Some of the Germans who worked for the Russians did work with Wernher von Braun before the war ended. One of the main differences was: The Americans let their Germans actively work on the space program. The Russians on the other hand just used their Germans to show them how the V2 worked and then shut them out from development because they were afraid of foreigners knowing their space technology.

As for the N1: That was more the result of internal fighting, not incompetence. The rocket development guy didn't like the best russian rocket engine developer, so he went to another manufacturer who could only build smaller engines. That's why the N1 had this impossible engine configuration that couldn't work.

Klopfer: As for the N1: That was more the result of internal fighting, not incompetence. The rocket development guy didn't like the best russian rocket engine developer, so he went to another manufacturer who could only build smaller engines. That's why the N1 had this impossible engine configuration that couldn't work.

I always thought it was because the design of large rocket engines was very difficult.

Von Braun had many widely publicised failures developing the F-1 engines for the Saturn Rockets. He almost lost his credibility trying to get it to work. Many people thought he was mad.

As I understand it, the russians had no hope of building larger rocket motors.

wejash:
The heavy launcher equivalent for the Saturn V just wasn't there.

You don't necessarily need heavy launch capability. They could have launched the individual components needed and assembled them in orbit. A bit riskier perhaps, in that you need 3 or 4 launches and rendezvous to go perfectly before you can even leave Earth orbit, but that risk can be mitigated by having back-up capability, and you could plausibly deny that it's a Moon mission if things go wrong before you leave LEO.

Late to the party...

Confirmation via the New York Times 1969. (new window)

...old news is very old.

/old recording is new.
//everything old is new again?

A voice is later heard saying: "I say, this has really been drama of the highest order.



Why don't you speak properly?

portscanner: I thought this was what the Ruskies sent to the moon:



/ obscure?



BRILLIANT!!!
I've got Oscar Goldman on the line now...

portscanner: I thought this was what the Ruskies sent to the moon:

venus. the russians sent it to venus. it returned and it was so heavily pressurized that it was practically invulnerable, steve austin had to screw a huge bolt into the top so it could be hauled away.

dannananananananana

limboslam: bingethinker: Hey Subby, we're coming up on the 40th anniversary of this being old news.

Subby is possibly below the age of 30. That age group's collective historical knowledge goes back only 7 years or so.

Agreed, but I think that groups historical knowledge doesn't go back further than last week's American Idol, at least from what I hear in the office.

Slaxl: That's like firing a gun down the 100m race track and saying your bullet got to the end first thus you win.

Or is it?

The trick is getting your bullet to stop before 100m. After that, it's just a leisurely stroll to the finish.

j/k

/or am I?

eqtworld: Elzar: So the Russians crash landed an unmanned spacecraft into the Southwestern United States?

It's sad how lazy we became in the 70s, it's like they were not even trying to make it look realistic anymore.



/THERE IS NOT ENOUGH AIR TO BREATH ON MARS YOU JERK

*not fooled*

There is too, enough air to breath on mars. Just not in any one place.

tinfoil-hat maggie: Therion: Okay, never mind, got it -



Also found a nice collection of some relatively obscure pics from the US space program -
http://americanpicturelinks.com/Moon.htm (new window)


Does this look slightly steam punk to anyone else?

It looks pretty fragile for something we choose to blow up out of our atmosphere, and plop on a foreign space rock.

Slaxl: arkansas: This is a very ignorant article. Luna 15 is well known. In addition, it was UNMANNED so it was ZERO competition to Apollo 11 even at the time. Even if it had landed successfully Apollo 11 would STILL have been the first manned moon landing. The two missions are not even comparable, and not even the Soviets would have tried to pass off Luna 15 as a competition with Apollo 11.

It was an attempt to return lunar soil to earth and that is all it was.

Silly.

Yeah, it's just an attempt to stir up controversy where none need exist. So the Russians flung something into the moon, it in no way puts them ahead of the Americans in the race to the moon. That's like firing a gun down the 100m race track and saying your bullet got to the end first thus you win.

Or is it?

By this point it had been obvious to the Soviets for quite some time that there was no way they were going to win the space race. Their huge N1 booster had a nasty habit of blowing up, pretty spectacularly I might add.

Their spin, had the Luna 15 been successful, would be that they had accomplished the same thing, returning samples of lunar soil to the earth, with superior unmanned technology and without risk of human life. If I remember correctly, they even planned for the return capsule with the lunar soil to arrive back at Earth before Apollo 11.

Therion: Okay, never mind, got it -

Also found a nice collection of some relatively obscure pics from the US space program -
http://americanpicturelinks.com/Moon.htm (new window)

Not sure what that is, but it's not the Soviet lunar rover. This is it: Link (new window)

Clan Xpy: tinfoil-hat maggie: Therion: Okay, never mind, got it -



Also found a nice collection of some relatively obscure pics from the US space program -
http://americanpicturelinks.com/Moon.htm (new window)


Does this look slightly steam punk to anyone else?

It looks pretty fragile for something we choose to blow up out of our atmosphere, and plop on a foreign space rock.

">Link (new window)

You do realize that they're contained within a fairing during launch, right?



eqtworld: wejash: The heavy launcher equivalent for the Saturn V just wasn't there.

That's Buran, the Soviet space shuttle. It flew its first and only flight in 1988, 19 years after Apollo 11.

The Soviets had an advantage in the early years of the space programme, ironically because their engineering was less advanced -- their nuclear engineering. Both nations' initial space rockets were, of course, originally designed to carry nuclear weapons. The Soviets had much greater lifting capability in the 1950s and early 1960s because they had needed to develop lifting capability much more than the Americans, because the Soviet nuclear weapons were vastly heavier, yield-to-yeald, than were American nukes.

They also had the advantage of not needing reliability to the same degree as Americans. The Russian (not simply Soviet; this is historical) mindset toward casualties has always been quite different from the American mindset. Moreover, of course, the Soviets only announced their launches and released the footage after the fact. The world was watching the Americans. So far more testing, and unmanned trial and error were required by the Americans than by the Soviets.

The Soviets largely plateaued on lifting capability, and intended to rely on Earth-orbit rendezvous, launching three rockets with the crew, landing vehicle, and trans-lunar injection booster all being mated up in Earth orbit.

The American team, lead by Dr. von Braun, was off to a smaller start, but did not plateau, building the Satun V with sufficient capacity and enough reliability.

I thought we were going to blow up the moon because it was teh ghey.

Sarah Palin sees the moon rearin' its head over Real Americans (tm) all the time. It isn't even part of America. We need to kill it with fire!

/grabbin mah pitchforks.

Is there a dvd commercially available to help show to my girlfriend that the moon landing was real? She doesn't believe it and thinks that it was faked 100%. I'm not sure how to combat it.