# Rivets on the Apollo Lunar Module? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 20, 2016, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443 "2016-07-20T18:59:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Diocletian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Diocletian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diocletian)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2016, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/1 "2016-07-20T18:59:32Z")
Okay, so my dad is a massive conspiracy theorist. One of the countless conspiracy theories he ascribes to is that the Moon landing was faked. Most of his arguments are flimsy and easily debunked by any sort of research. However, he uses one which I have never heard anywhere else and I’m not sure how to respond to. He says that the Apollo lander doesn’t fit engineering standards as far riveting goes (for reference, my dad’s degrees are in Telecommunications and Business Administration, so I really don’t think he knows the engineering standards on riveting). For evidence, he uses two photos that I will attach here. He says that the Apollo lander was just a prop, while the replica lander actually has the proper riveting. He also points to “buckling” on the actual lander. What do you guys make of this? [Apollo Lander](http://images.flatworldknowledge.com/ketchen/ketchen-fig02_x003.jpg) [Apollo Lander Replica](http://historicspacecraft.com/Photos/Lunar_Module/LM-2_NASM_RK_2008_9.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![AndrewL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@AndrewL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AndrewL)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2016, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/2 "2016-07-20T19:15:43Z")
The flimsy-looking panels that you can see on the back of the lander in the first picture are non-structural insulation sheets. They aren’t attached very strongly, because they don’t need to be - they’re very lightweight material, there’s no air to tear them off, and they aren’t bearing any load. I’m not even sure those actual rivets holding them in place. The panels on the replica are heavier, more structural, and have to withstand air currents and the occasional museum attendee throwing something at them. ---
**Author:** ![beowulff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beowulff/32/542_2.png) [@beowulff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beowulff)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2016, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/3 "2016-07-20T19:23:04Z")
It’s pointless to argue. But, if you feel you must, you might want to ask him what he thinks those rivets are doing? If he says anything other than “holding some light-weight sun-shields on,” you should ask him to check the design information. As for buckling - the LM was designed to buckle upon landing, since it was a single-use machine, and needed to be as light as possible. Some discussion here: [crewed spaceflight - Why does the ascent stage of Apollo 11's lunar module look like it's made of paper? - Space Exploration Stack Exchange](http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/5899/why-does-the-ascent-stage-of-apollo-11s-lunar-module-look-like-its-made-of-pap) ---
**Author:** ![Duckster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duckster/32/1244_2.png) [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2016, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/4 "2016-07-20T20:19:50Z")
> [@](#): > > Many accounts of Apollo refer to the LM with words like ‘flimsy’ and ‘fragile’ but these are not wholly correct. Much of the exterior was covered in protective multi-layer insulation foil, in some locations this was taped or stapled into place. Exhaust gases from the vehicle’s engines and jets could disturb this foil and occasionally rip it to tatters, damage which is clearly visible in some images. However beneath the foil insulation was the craft’s robust pressure hull of metal skin and stringer construction. To avoid riveting or welding the skin and stringers together, Grumman precisely chemically milled the skin panels out of solid aluminium ingots so that the skin and stringers were the same piece of metal. Although its weight eventually rose to almost 15 tonnes, the LM was a fine flying machine, handling like a “nimble, responsive jet fighter”. [http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/nasas-lunar-module-everything-you-need-to-know.html](http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/nasas-lunar-module-everything-you-need-to-know.html) ---
**Author:** ![Ignotus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ecc23a/32.png) [@Ignotus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ignotus)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2016, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/5 "2016-07-20T21:24:57Z")
We tend to think of space – the ultimate vacuum – as _infinitely sucking_. But it isn’t so. In fact, it’s the air inside that’s _pushing_; and the air pressure in the lunar (and command) modules were a measly 0.2 atm., even less than the overpressure a beer can holds… ---
**Author:** ![Common\_Tater](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/common_tater/32/13846_2.png) [@Common\_Tater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Common_Tater)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2016, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/6 "2016-07-20T21:33:18Z")
Jesus Christ, do we send Buzz Aldrin over to kick his ass? He is aware there are fucking photos of the Apollo mission spacecraft on the lunar surface, taken from orbiting telescopes? There is no debate about this. Americans, an even dozen, walked on the moon, jeeze louise this is pathetic. ---
**Author:** ![Francis\_Vaughan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/francis_vaughan/32/3093_2.png) [@Francis\_Vaughan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Francis_Vaughan)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 6:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/7 "2016-07-21T06:38:17Z")
Conspiracy theorists are usually not worth the effort. However there is a lovely picture [here](http://www.flickriver.com/photos/23269353@N00/tags/projectapollo/) that shows a LM in its naked glory. Also, there are two pics of a split open LM, which shows clearly the pressure vessel the crew inhabit. The manner in which the ribbed structure of the pressure vessel is build should be clear. For all useful intents, the externally visible surfaces of the LM are not structural. They are all involved in thermal control to one extent or another. The actual structure is within. The big wobbly panels on the back of the LM cover all the externally mounted support equipment. They are tacked in place pretty much in final close out of LM. They are most certainly not structural. Also worth pointing out that the LM was so fragile, that riveting of the structure wasn’t an option anyway. It was much more extreme than that. ---
**Author:** ![joema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a9adbd/32.png) [@joema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joema)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/8 "2016-07-21T11:49:07Z")
> [@Diocletian](#): > > …He says that the Apollo lander was just a prop, while the replica lander actually has the proper riveting. He also points to “buckling” on the actual lander. What do you guys make of this?.. As already mentioned the external skins on the LM were not structural – they restrained underlying thermal insulation and formed a rudimentary micro-meteoroid shield. On the Apollo 16, some of these flimsy panels were bent and torn partially off. It had no effect on the underlying structure: [![](https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7100/7008828495_7b0507f25a.jpg) ](https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7100/7008828495_7b0507f25a.jpg) The relationship of the underlying structure to the top layer of insulating foil and panels can be seen in these construction and test photos: [http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/misc/apmisc-LM-noID-16.jpg](http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/misc/apmisc-LM-noID-16.jpg) [http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/misc/apmisc-LM-noID-18.jpg](http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/misc/apmisc-LM-noID-18.jpg) [http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/misc/apmisc-LM-noID-11.jpg](http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/misc/apmisc-LM-noID-11.jpg) [http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/721779main\_lunar20module.jpg](http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/721779main_lunar20module.jpg) Grumman S/CAT LM manufacturing and test: [http://www.ehartwell.com/LM/SCATManufacturing.htm](http://www.ehartwell.com/LM/SCATManufacturing.htm) NASA paper on Lunar Module structure: [Apollo experience report: Lunar module structural subsystem - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)](http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730010174.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/9 "2016-07-21T11:59:45Z")
> [@Common\_Tater](#): > > Jesus Christ, do we send Buzz Aldrin over to kick his ass? > > He is aware there are fucking photos of the Apollo mission spacecraft on the lunar surface, taken from orbiting telescopes? There is no debate about this. There’s no debate to you, or to most people, but that’s the whole point when it comes to CTs. You can’t just go up to a CT and say ‘knock it off already, we’ve been through this’. Besides, I’m not sure why you think a picture would make a difference, when (in this case) it’s a picture he specifically has a problem with. Try talking to a CT someday in real life. It’s like arguing with a wall. I’ve got one in my family that doesn’t go more than an hour without talking about chemtrails and now he’s on about the fall out from Fukushima and how much the government is hiding about it. The thing about it is, you can’t say ‘look here’s the data’ because the answer is ‘that’s fake’ or ‘here’s a picture’ because ‘that’s photoshopped’. You can’t say ‘this person has actually been there’, because ‘they’re lying’. Wait tell till you meet someone that explains to you why they really put floride in the water. Oh and to the OP, the best course of action is to not bring it up again and if it does come up, it’s probably easiest to just say ‘yeah, dad, you’re probably right’. Honestly, it’s not worth fighting. I look at this kind of thing like an Atheist trying to explain to a religious person why I don’t believe in God. There’s nothing I can say or do that’s going to change their mind. Not only that, in most cases, they’re not even going to be able to wrap their head around my POV. It’s easier to just not bring it up. ---
**Author:** ![Sigene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df788c/32.png) [@Sigene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sigene)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 12:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/10 "2016-07-21T12:58:32Z")
Religious conviction to an idea is very difficult to cure. I’m convinced its the source of nearly all of our problems as a society. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/11 "2016-07-21T15:17:56Z")
> [@joema](#): > > As already mentioned the external skins on the LM were not structural – they restrained underlying thermal insulation and formed a rudimentary micro-meteoroid shield. I have read that you could punch your hand through the skin. ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/12 "2016-07-21T16:33:49Z")
> [@Sigene](#): > > Religious conviction to an idea is very difficult to cure. Convincing someone that god doesn’t exist isn’t all that different than trying to explain to them that anything else that there’s no proof for isn’t true. One person believes in the 7 plagues, the other in chemtrails. One person thinks God was trying to get his way, the other thinks the goverment is. You can argue all day that this or that biblical think didn’t happen the same way you can try to explain that flouride isn’t put into the water to control your mind. In both cases, if your lucky, you’ll get the person to say ‘well, it’s just what I believe’. At least (WRT CT’s) you’re getting them to admit it’s not rooted in fact. I’ll admit, it’s not a perfect analogy, CT’s tend to think think the goverment is out to get them, or at least hide something from them. That’s not typically the case with religious people. I’m just suggesting that trying to convince someone that their CT is wrong is just as pointless as trying to talk them out of religion. Just let them be. Anything else is a waste of your time. ---
**Author:** ![Sigene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/df788c/32.png) [@Sigene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sigene)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/13 "2016-07-21T16:59:21Z")
> [@Joey\_P](#): > > Convincing someone that god doesn’t exist isn’t all that different than trying to explain to them that anything else that there’s no proof for isn’t true. > > One person believes in the 7 plagues, the other in chemtrails. One person thinks God was trying to get his way, the other thinks the goverment is. > You can argue all day that this or that biblical think didn’t happen the same way you can try to explain that flouride isn’t put into the water to control your mind. In both cases, if your lucky, you’ll get the person to say ‘well, it’s just what I believe’. At least (WRT CT’s) you’re getting them to admit it’s not rooted in fact. > > I’ll admit, it’s not a perfect analogy, CT’s tend to think think the goverment is out to get them, or at least hide something from them. That’s not typically the case with religious people. I’m just suggesting that trying to convince someone that their CT is wrong is just as pointless as trying to talk them out of religion. Just let them be. Anything else is a waste of your time. Pretty much why I call it ‘religious conviction’ instead of just ‘religion’. I don’t want to sidetrack too much, but people make claims that religions kill a lot of people; then the religious point out the ‘atheistic’ regimes of Mao and Stalin. When looked at with the broader focus of "religious conviction’ to an idea, vs more the narrower view of religion; it becomes clearer that they are very similar. Same thing happening in North Korea, where there is a religious conviction to the state. The analogy can be further extended to religious dedication to political party, unions, communes, cults, militias, movements, etc. Probably should have a separate thread of all of this, so the OP’s thread doesn’t get too sidetracked ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/14 "2016-07-21T20:21:00Z")
**Francis Vaughan** and **joema** : Wow! Thank you for pics! Very pretty! Happy 47th anniversary of the first landing! ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/15 "2016-07-21T21:08:23Z")
[Here’s a photo of the Apollo 16 LM ascent stage](http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo16/html/as16-122-19533.html) as it prepares to dock with the command module. You can see the thermal panels are bent badly out of shape, and you can see the gold colored MLI (multilayer insulation) underneath. ---
**Author:** ![Francis\_Vaughan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/francis_vaughan/32/3093_2.png) [@Francis\_Vaughan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Francis_Vaughan)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/16 "2016-07-21T22:33:32Z")
And [here](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/db/Apollo_17_Astronaut_Training_-_GPN-2000-000640.jpg) is the pic I was trying to find earlier that shows exactly what the ascent stage looks like before they add the covers. It meshes nicely with the pic **src4** links to. This pic is Apollo 17, but is otherwise an identical LM to the one used for Apollo 16. You can see that they left the covers off until right before launch. [Here](http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/721779main_lunar20module.jpg) is a pic of an earlier LM (looks like Apollo 5 to me - unmanned test flight of LM) with the LM being mated to its adaptor prior to launch. Also, covers off. ---
**Author:** ![Number](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/number/32/242_2.png) [@Number](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Number)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/17 "2016-07-21T23:41:56Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > I have read that you could punch your hand through the skin. Well, Buzz Aldrin could. To be fair, the skin really shouldn’t have called him a coward and a liar and a thief. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2016, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/18 "2016-07-21T23:59:27Z")
> [@Number](#): > > Well, Buzz Aldrin could. > > To be fair, the skin really shouldn’t have called him a coward and a liar and a thief. I’d be afraid of rolling over in my sleep and punching a hole through the skin. But then, I ubderstand they had trouble sleeping. So would I. “JESUS CHRIST, I AM ON THE MOON AND THEY WANT ME TO _SLEEP_?” ---
**Author:** ![Vicsage](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/e68b1a/32.png) [@Vicsage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vicsage)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2016, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/19 "2016-07-22T00:32:10Z")
You’re all being too critical of conspiracy theories. Sometimes the government does do bad things and lies about it. The Tuskegee syphillis study happened and was covered up for years. The Maine was not blown up by the Spanish in Cuba. The Gulf of Tonkin Incident was fabricated. In 1979 the House Committee on Assassinations reported that JFK was probably killed by a conspiracy, but all we hear about is the Warren Commission’s report. Are most CT wrong? Yes, but our government has given us ample reasons to believe them by the way they’ve lied to us in the past. ---
**Author:** ![commasense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/commasense/32/3017_2.png) [@commasense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/commasense)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2016, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443/20 "2016-07-22T00:37:24Z")
FYI, the “replica” picture is NOT a replica. It is [LM-2 at the National Air and Space Museum](https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/lunar-module-2-apollo)in Washington, DC (as indicated by the photo’s file name). > [@National Air and Space Museum](#): > > LM-2 was built for a second unmanned Earth-orbit test flight. Because the test flight of LM 1, named Apollo 5, was so successful, a second mission was deemed unnecessary. LM-2 was used for ground testing prior to the first successful Moon-landing mission. In 1970 the ascent stage of LM-2 spent several months on display at the “Expo '70” in Osaka, Japan. When it returned to the United States, it was reunited with its descent stage, modified to appear like the Apollo 11 Lunar Module “Eagle,” and transferred to the Smithsonian for display. The fact that it was modified by the museum to make it look like the Apollo 13 LM will no doubt send some CTs off into a new tizzy of speculation, but that kind of thing is done all the time by museums. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rivets-on-the-apollo-lunar-module/760443.md?page=2)