Obvious things about the “lunar scam”

One piece of evidence is enough to dispel doubts about a man’s flight to the moon.

Saturn V flew

If, in front of tens of thousands of eyewitnesses who gathered on the day of launch at Cape Canaveral, the 2300-ton carrier was able to ascend into the sky, then all the disputes about flags, wrong dust and fake photographs no longer matter. The energy capabilities of launch vehicles and booster blocks (thrust, specific impulse) are a defining moment in the implementation of interplanetary flights. And if they were able to overcome the most difficult test, the rest of the stages of the path could no longer cause problems. Technically, docking, flying and landing on the lunar surface is easier than creating the Saturn V super rocket.

Tourists on Cape Canaveral, on the day of Apollo 11 launch

Each of the five engines of the first stage of “Saturn” burned two tons of liquid oxygen and a thousand liters of kerosene per second. The gas generator developed power, like the turbines of a nuclear icebreaker. In just two minutes, the thousand-ton structure accelerated to a hypersonic speed of 10 thousand km / h and reached an altitude of 68 kilometers.

If modern “exposers” could feel the tremors of the earth and witness this fiery storm with their own eyes, they would hesitate to publish their “revelations”.

Saturn V has certainly flown. Its start thirteen times in a row was personally observed by thousands of witnesses. And on the other side of the Earth, the lunar mission was closely watched by powerful Soviet telescopes. The military and scientists could not be mistaken, seeing how the 47-ton ship entered the departure trajectory to the Moon …

After all, who else, besides Saturn V, could launch the Skylab orbital station (77 tons, 1973) ??

There is another concrete argument, the authenticity of which cannot be questioned. The lunar program was seriously worked on in the Soviet Union. Which means only one thing – domestic experts did not consider landing a man on the moon a technically insoluble task. Within the framework of the Soviet lunar program, a full range of technical equipment was created: the super-heavy launch vehicle N-1, the LOK lunar orbital vehicle, the LK descent module and the Krechet lunar spacesuit.

All this was repeatedly tested and took part in space flights!

Instead of reading the fascinating books by Y. Mukhin, it is better to find detailed information about the secret victories of the Soviet Space.

“Space-379”, “Space-398” and “Space-434”. Three successively successful flights of the LK lunar module (in unmanned version) with a cycle of maneuvers in near-earth orbit.

“Space-146”, “Space-154”as well as a series of 12 launches under the Probe program… All these are tests of the Soyuz 7K-L1 spacecraft, created for a manned flyby of the Moon (without landing). Konstruktinvo, it was the Soyuz spacecraft without a utility compartment, instead of which the D-1 upper stage was docked. Also, the lunar Soyuz was distinguished by the presence of a long-range space communication system and enhanced thermal protection. It was viewed by the Soviet leadership as a relatively simple and cheap ersatz project for inflicting another defeat on America in the Space Race.

The spacecraft Zond-5, 6, 7, 8 performed flawlessly the program of the flight around the Moon. It was Zond-5 that became the first spacecraft to fly around the Moon with living organisms on board with their subsequent safe return to Earth (hello to all lovers of tales about terrible radiation belts, supposedly killing all living things).

As for a number of failures, the state commission came to the conclusion that if the “Probe” was in a manned version, its crew with a high probability could correct the errors of the automation that was still imperfect at that time.

The real problems arose only with the most complex component of the system – the super-heavy carrier rocket N-1. But even in this case, one cannot doubt the reality of its existence. As for the first unsuccessful launches of the N-1, they really did not have time to “finish” it. We could, but did not have time.

And after that, various “flies” come, and talk about filming in the pavilions of Hollywood. Shame.

As for the direct landing of the Americans on the moon:

The fact of the existence and flights of the super-heavy launch vehicle “Saturn V” is beyond doubt.

The next component of the lunar expedition is the heavy manned Apollo spacecraft. Soviet cosmonauts A. Leonov and V. Kubasov, participants in the experimental flight under the Soyuz-Apollo international program (docking of two spacecraft in orbit, July 15, 1975), could confirm the existence of this spacecraft.

The volume of the command compartment is 6 cubic meters. meters.
Estimated autonomy – 14 days (with the duration of lunar missions from 8 to 12 days).
The fuel supply in the tanks of the service compartment is 7 tons.
The stock of the oxidizer is over 11 tons.
The total mass of the spacecraft (excluding the lunar module) is 30 tons.

Life support systems are normal. The full stock of fuel is 18.4 tons (excluding 120 kg of nitrogen tetroxide for attitude control engines). Large and heavy “Apollo” had all the technical capabilities for the implementation of the lunar expedition (of course, because it was created for this).

Moon Landing. For some reason, this given is subject to the greatest doubt among the debunkers of the “lunar scam”. The Americans built a rocket, but could not land the module, because … Because all this is incredibly difficult from the point of view of the layman.

But how great is the complexity of such maneuvers for those who seriously dealt with the problem? The answer can be given by aircraft with vertical take-off and landing.

The birthday of domestic VTOL aircraft is considered March 24, 1966. On this day, three years before the Americans landed on the moon, the Soviet Yak-36 performed a vertical takeoff and landing.

What was the difference between the vertical landing of the Yak and the landing of the lunar Eagle?

In both cases, the fuel supply is limited. The view from the cockpit is poor. “Yak” is even more difficult – unlike Armstrong and Aldrin, his pilot has to deal with the negative influence of the earth’s atmosphere, incl. dangerous gusts of crosswind. Simultaneously, controlling two lift-sustainer engines + a system of jet rudders in the front and rear parts of the fuselage.

At the same time, the thrust of the “Eagle” engine was two times less than the total thrust of the Yak-36 engines !!! In conditions of six times less gravity, the lunar module was content with a thrust of only 4.5 tons (versus 10 tons for the Yak). Taking into account the fact that at the time of landing it was operating at minimum mode, this explains the absence of any “terrible craters formed from the jet stream” at the place where the Eagle landed.

And they landed! With the proper preparation, this trick became commonplace.

In 1972, the first Yak-38 made a vertical landing on the swinging deck of a moving ship. The total flight time of these machines was 30,000 hours !!

During the events of the Falklands War, the British managed to land their “Harriers” on the decks of aircraft carriers in continuous fog, when the amplitude of the vertical movements of the deck reached several meters. And this was done by ordinary combat pilots. Without the help of modern computers. Based solely on my flying skills and intuition.

But Armstrogn and Aldrin’s hands, apparently, grew out of the wrong place. They could not land the “Eagle” on a static surface, even when we were together, with information support and advice from the mission control center.

As for the space velocities of the “Eagle”, the deorbiting and approaching the lunar surface represented a set of algorithms for turning on the braking engine, compiled on Earth. Accurate to the second. As with the usual return of astronauts to Earth.

What’s so special about it?

Finally, if everything was so bad, how did you manage to carry out SIX soft landings of automatic stations “Server” (1966-68, the purpose of the mission was to check the density of the soil, collect information about the relief and features of the areas selected for the work of subsequent manned missions).

Further more. Landing on Soviet stations:
“Luna-9” – 1966, the first soft landing on the surface. This was followed by Luna 12, 16, 17, 20, 21 and 24. Seven domestic vehicles successfully reached the Moon, moreover, taking into account the level of technology development in the 1960s, they did it almost blindly!

“Luna-16” not only landed on the moon, but also took off, delivering lunar soil samples to Earth in September 1970. Luna-24 did the same.

“Luna-17” and “Luna-21” successfully delivered 800-kg lunar rovers to the satellite surface.

And then charlatans will come and say: “Why are the Americans flying the flag? The technology of that time did not allow to fly to the moon ”.

Moreover, the Soviet and American space programs have always been on the same level. And if we could – why couldn’t they?

Why did you stop flying to the moon?

A manned flight to the moon does not represent any practical value even in the future of the coming decades (neither in industrial, nor in economic, nor even in military terms). What can we say about the 70s. last century!

For a similar reason, the Yankees froze manned flights to the ISS for a whole decade – from 2011 to the early 2020s. (renewal, plan). But isn’t this a reason to doubt the existence of the Shuttles?

Mukhin and Co can consider themselves smarter than everyone else, cleverly “calculating” forgeries and traces of retouching in photographs of American expeditions. ABOUT! – here is the second light source. And this is a narrowing shadow. The wrong stone is there. And it all looks ridiculous. It is logical to assume that if the people who built the 2300-ton “Saturn” decided to really deceive everyone, then you would not have guessed about a fake soon enough.

Although for what the fakes are needed – is there a ready-made launch vehicle of the required power, a ready-made ship and a landing module? Everything is ready for the expedition, but they decided to shoot in Hollywood. So that later the whistleblowers could earn millions on their “revelations”.

Forty years have passed, has not a single apparatus appeared, capable of photographing the Apollo landing sites, in order to dispel doubts once and for all?

Launched in 2009, Lunar Orbital Reconnaissance (LRO) helped compile a detailed 3D map of the lunar surface with a resolution of up to 0.5 m. All the Apollo landing sites and Soviet robotic stations were captured in the frame.

Apollo 12 landing site

The landing stage of the Soviet AMS “Luna-24”

Of course, this argument is not worth a penny in disputes with supporters of the “lunar conspiracy.” All traces of man’s presence on the moon were undoubtedly drawn in Photoshop.

But the main arguments remain unshakable.

Thirteen successful launches of the Saturn V super-heavy LV

Completely finished Soviet lunar program, not implemented only because of the willful decision of the country’s top leadership. More precisely, the loss of the need to continue the “lunar race”.

If the Yankees half a century ago built a rocket engine with a thrust of 700 tons (the thrust of one F-1 exceeded the thrust of all 32 rocket engines in both stages of the Soyuz launch vehicle), then why do these “geniuses” now fly on Russian engines?

The production technology of “Saturn” is irretrievably lost, as well as the technology of production of damask steel. And this is never a joke. Six million parts is the most complex system ever created by man. Despite the preserved drawings and even samples of engines, now no one will remember in what order all this was assembled and what materials were used in the manufacture of individual elements. But the main thing is that even having spent billions on the analysis of the surviving samples of the launch vehicle and completely restoring the technology, it is completely unclear who will now take up the production of Saturn.

Hundreds of contractors took part in the work on the Saturn-Apollo program, many of which over the past 40 years changed their line of business, were overbought, merged with each other or went bankrupt, dissolving in time.

Currently, a galaxy of 16 rocket engines and booster blocks is used overseas (Rocketdyne-68, RL-10 family, “Centaurus”, “Falkens” by Elon Musk, SRB solid-fuel booster – the most powerful rocket engine ever created, more thrust than the rocket engine “Saturn”, etc.).

Among them are only two engines of Russian origin. These are RD-180 (the first stage of the Atlas-III / V launch vehicle) and the modernized NK-33 (the first stage of the Antares launch vehicle). This is not an argument for NASA’s technological impotence. This is a business.

Photo gallery:

Launch of 130-meter launch vehicle “Saturn V”

Soviet lunar spacesuit “Krechet”

Lander cockpit

Lunar soil samples delivered by the Apollo 11 expedition, Moscow, VDNKh exhibition

Moonstone Vault

The camera of the automatic station “Surveyor-3”, delivered to Earth by the expedition “Apollo-12” (the module landed 400 meters from the landing site of the “Surveyor”)

The article is posted on the website 2016-01-05

Recommended For You

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *