[Rama Set]

What is a hill sphere? (He asked trepidatiously)

[Venus]

I didn't respond to your post because, besides it being poorly written, was little more than gainsaying without any actual evidence to back it up. Basically filling the function of a NASA apologist, which I have no doubt if I showed you 10 videos or photos of how obvious mistakes were made (or purposefully inserted) you would just list them off and find any possible way to defend your position, in the face of logic evidence and common sense.

Yes please...links to the videos and photos that you believe we cannot debunk !!

[andruszkow]

What is a hill sphere? (He asked trepidatiously)

Think of it as the point where celestial bodies battles to be the sphere of influence, like the Lagrange points.

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

OK I'll play along. How did the module reach 5000mph? We have super sonic jet engines to do that on earth. The lunar module had fire crackers.

Keep pushing a false narrative about how I don't understand, you haven't demonstrated that you do either. At this point I don't really give a fuck what any of you think and I advise you to do the same about my opinion. You guys treat this like a job so it definitely makes it hard not to write you off as a shill. You have way way too much of a vested interest here and it's not even veiled hat so ever.

You want to keep questioning my intelligence I have no choice but to question your credibility.

Anyway I'm done with this forum and forums like these. I'm sure you'll get a nice little shill bonus for every person you turn away from open discussion so make sure you collect.

You've got to be an idiot by the way to watch any Apollo video and think it looks real. Either you are delusional or a liar when you pretend it does.

[Venus]

OK I'll play along. How did the module reach 5000mph? We have super sonic jet engines to do that on earth. The lunar module had fire crackers.

Keep pushing a false narrative about how I don't understand, you haven't demonstrated that you do either. At this point I don't really give a fuck what any of you think and I advise you to do the same about my opinion. You guys treat this like a job so it definitely makes it hard not to write you off as a shill. You have way way too much of a vested interest here and it's not even veiled hat so ever.

You want to keep questioning my intelligence I have no choice but to question your credibility.

Anyway I'm done with this forum and forums like these. I'm sure you'll get a nice little shill bonus for every person you turn away from open discussion so make sure you collect.

Payloads... weight of lunar

You've got to be an idiot by the way to watch any Apollo video and think it looks real. Either you are delusional or a liar when you pretend it does.

Perhaps the size of the payload of what took off from earth (Saturn V plus fuel plus CMS plus LLM etc) compared to the LLM taking off from the moon (and leaving the landing platform behind) ??
I will be the first to admit that I am no rocket scientist but that was my first thought...
http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/nasas-lunar-module-everything-you-need-to-know.html

Go to 0:50

[andruszkow]

OK I'll play along. How did the module reach 5000mph? We have super sonic jet engines to do that on earth. The lunar module had fire crackers.

Keep pushing a false narrative about how I don't understand, you haven't demonstrated that you do either. At this point I don't really give a fuck what any of you think and I advise you to do the same about my opinion. You guys treat this like a job so it definitely makes it hard not to write you off as a shill. You have way way too much of a vested interest here and it's not even veiled hat so ever.

You want to keep questioning my intelligence I have no choice but to question your credibility.

Anyway I'm done with this forum and forums like these. I'm sure you'll get a nice little shill bonus for every person you turn away from open discussion so make sure you collect.

You've got to be an idiot by the way to watch any Apollo video and think it looks real. Either you are delusional or a liar when you pretend it does.

Super sonic jet engines use compressed air from the atmosphere so they won't work on the moon to begin with.

As long as the thrust to weight ratio is higher than 1, you can get to orbit if that's what you aim for even if you're only able to accelerate with 1m/s,  given you have enough fuel to do so. TWR rises as the fuel is consumed. The moon has no atmosphere, remember? You would "Only" be fighting gravity.

Guess I'm an idiot then.

[Rama Set]

The LEM was using powered flight the whole way correct?  It was not a ballistic trajectory?

[TotesNotReptilian]

OK I'll play along. How did the module reach 5000mph? We have super sonic jet engines to do that on earth. The lunar module had fire crackers.

Simple arithmetic:

thrust: 16,000 N (1 N = 1 kg*m/s²)
mass: 4,700 kg
weight at surface: W = mass * g_moon = 4,700 kg * 1.6 m/s² = 7,520 N
acceleration at takeoff:  a = (thrust-weight)/mass = (16,000 N - 7,520 N) / 4,700 kg = 1.8 m/s²
acceleration in orbit: a = thrust/mass = 16,000N / 4,700 kg = 3.4 m/s²
average acceleration = 2.6 m/s² (very rough approximation)
 
time to reach 5000 mph (2200 m/s): t = v / a = 2200 m/s / 2.6 m/s = 846 s = 14 minutes (very rough approximation)

The moon has negligible atmosphere, so wind resistance isn't a factor. "Super sonic" refers to the speed of sound, which is irrelevant without an atmosphere. Likewise, jet engines rely on an atmosphere to function. That's why they use rockets instead of jet engines.

Keep pushing a false narrative about how I don't understand, you haven't demonstrated that you do either. At this point I don't really give a fuck what any of you think and I advise you to do the same about my opinion. You guys treat this like a job so it definitely makes it hard not to write you off as a shill. You have way way too much of a vested interest here and it's not even veiled hat so ever.

You want to keep questioning my intelligence I have no choice but to question your credibility.

My status has absolutely nothing to do with the arguments I make. Never once have I said "trust me, I am a ____ scientist". My arguments stand on their own merit. It isn't a job, but it is mildly entertaining. I post when I am bored.

Furthermore, I never questioned your intelligence. I only questioned your knowledge of this specific subject. It was just friendly advice to not make snap judgements from a position of ignorance.

Anyway I'm done with this forum and forums like these. I'm sure you'll get a nice little shill bonus for every person you turn away from open discussion so make sure you collect.

Ah, the "rage quit" approach. Classic.

You've got to be an idiot by the way to watch any Apollo video and think it looks real. Either you are delusional or a liar when you pretend it does.

As I stated in a different thread, I don't put much stock in your gut feelings.

[Luke 22:35-38]

OK I'll play along. How did the module reach 5000mph? We have super sonic jet engines to do that on earth. The lunar module had fire crackers.

Keep pushing a false narrative about how I don't understand, you haven't demonstrated that you do either. At this point I don't really give a fuck what any of you think and I advise you to do the same about my opinion. You guys treat this like a job so it definitely makes it hard not to write you off as a shill. You have way way too much of a vested interest here and it's not even veiled hat so ever.

You want to keep questioning my intelligence I have no choice but to question your credibility.

Anyway I'm done with this forum and forums like these. I'm sure you'll get a nice little shill bonus for every person you turn away from open discussion so make sure you collect.

Payloads... weight of lunar

You've got to be an idiot by the way to watch any Apollo video and think it looks real. Either you are delusional or a liar when you pretend it does.

Perhaps the size of the payload of what took off from earth (Saturn V plus fuel plus CMS plus LLM etc) compared to the LLM taking off from the moon (and leaving the landing platform behind) ??
I will be the first to admit that I am no rocket scientist but that was my first thought...
http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/nasas-lunar-module-everything-you-need-to-know.html

Go to 0:50

I believe we went to the moon but I always wondered who took the shot of them leaving.

[andruszkow]

OK I'll play along. How did the module reach 5000mph? We have super sonic jet engines to do that on earth. The lunar module had fire crackers.

Keep pushing a false narrative about how I don't understand, you haven't demonstrated that you do either. At this point I don't really give a fuck what any of you think and I advise you to do the same about my opinion. You guys treat this like a job so it definitely makes it hard not to write you off as a shill. You have way way too much of a vested interest here and it's not even veiled hat so ever.

You want to keep questioning my intelligence I have no choice but to question your credibility.

Anyway I'm done with this forum and forums like these. I'm sure you'll get a nice little shill bonus for every person you turn away from open discussion so make sure you collect.

Payloads... weight of lunar

You've got to be an idiot by the way to watch any Apollo video and think it looks real. Either you are delusional or a liar when you pretend it does.

Perhaps the size of the payload of what took off from earth (Saturn V plus fuel plus CMS plus LLM etc) compared to the LLM taking off from the moon (and leaving the landing platform behind) ??
I will be the first to admit that I am no rocket scientist but that was my first thought...
http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/nasas-lunar-module-everything-you-need-to-know.html

Go to 0:50

I believe we went to the moon but I always wondered who took the shot of them leaving.

No one did for Apollo 11 (and 12). There's no lunar ascent footage from those missions, but the Apollo missions that brought rovers had cameras mounted on them that were remote controlled from earth.

[rabinoz]

Here's something I was wondering about. If they had advance technology to fake the landings, shouldn't they have the technology to actually land on the moon?

Not really.  Doctoring photos is much different than rocket propulsion.

Much, much easier.

Can you tell me how me how they calculated A. The gravity of the moon prior to going there B. The rotational speed of the moon C. How much fuel they would need to reach a horizontal escape velocity and D. how they were so perfectly precise to rendezvous with the orbiter

I know I'm late, but haven't you worked this out yet? I tried months ago to explain it. I guess I failed!

Remember this?

And they calculated the moons gravity how? Because as far as I can tell there is still debate about earths which should be a lot easier to detect because a. Its a lot bigger and b. Were actually on it. Now that wouldn't be too big of a deal if we assume it is a certain level and overcompensate but getting the "command module" to orbit seems a complicated task.

Its all bullshit you can live in fantasy space land but I'll stay down here in reality.

I don't see any debate on "there is still debate about earths" gravity. Even TFES says it is 9.8m/s^2. Who's debating?
The launch from earth was far more than "getting the 'command module' to orbit".
You write as though you no idea of what was involved, and I am certainly not going into the details that you look up yourself.

Orbiting is based on the principle of a "free fall" which means a vessel is traveling so fast it effectively falls "over" the horizon. Earth's gravity being 9.8m/s^2 is the way they determined just how fast a vessel would have to be to "orbit" Earth.

Now did someone send a "cavendish" device to the moon? And a scientist check its results after a year? If not, how did we know the density of the moon to be able to create a "command module" that is capable of reaching exactly the right speed to orbit the moon?

I think you are underestimating my perception of the principles of orbit. Maybe it's easier to paint me with the idiot brush but you can't say I'm wholly ignorant of the concepts.

I guess I failed back there, so as they say in the classics: If at first you don't succeed, try again - after that don't be a fool, GIVE UP! Still I'll try.

You ask: "Can you tell me how me how they calculated:"

• "A. The gravity of the moon prior to going there"
  Easy, they had sent probes crashing into the moon and lunar orbiters. Both of those let them calculate the GM product for the moon and the radius of the moon is known quite accurately.
• "B. The rotational speed of the moon"
  You really ask that? Looking at it from earth will let you calculate that. The rotational speed of the earth is known very accurately - 360° in 23.9345 hours.
• "C. How much fuel they would need to reach a horizontal escape velocity"
  That is as easy for "Rocket Scientists" 2+2 is for you and I. Basically it's their "bread and butter" and the basics of that were even known to one of the earliest Rocket Scientists, the Russian Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, around the beginning of the 29th century.
• "D. how they were so perfectly precise to rendezvous with the orbiter"
  I'm no rocket expert, but I imagine they did a "main burn" at lift off, then some shorter "correction burns" for the finally rendezvous with the command module.
  I guess I could "copy and paste" the "Rocket Equation". The basic one gives "delta V" in the absence of other forces (drag, gravity), then there are the much more complex ones allowing for these. But, I guess this would help, so I won't waste the time.

Just because you or I calculate these things, does not mean it cannot be done. How are you at:

• calculating the complex transfer function of an amplifier - used to be my "bread and butter".
• (a lot harder) using the "Schwarzschild solution" to find an approximation for the motion of a small body moving above the much larger earth under Einstein's GR - I wouldn't have a clue as to how to do it!

Surely you can look this stuff as easily as most people.

Your attitude seems to be "I don't understand these things, so they must be fake".  The trouble is you never accept any explanations give.

You just have to accept that there will always be numerous things that you and I will never understand fully. If it is something you think is important, you can research it, but no one person has ever understood everything!

Really I think your trouble is that you are convinced "Its all bullshit you can live in fantasy space land but I'll stay down here in reality", so there is really no point explaining anything to you - I believe the best description of you is "Brainwashed" - nothing could possibly convince you.

BTW Decided if the earth is Flat or a Globe yet? Hint,
          Look a t a good sunrise or sunset (or moonrise or moonset) over the ocean and try to explain that with perspective or whatever TFES uses lately!
          Consider that both the sun and moon stay essentially the same size as they (appear to) move across the sky from rising to setting!
          See if you can find ANY flat earth map that has the correct shapes for all the countries and continents AND the correct distances between them.