Was that a cover-up? I thought it was just a bad leap to a conclusion. Our ship blew up in their port: hadda be a mine!
I thought the ship’s crew mistakenly believed that they were under attack.
That is entirely different from the Apollo project where 400,000 people and 20,000 companies worked on it. You couldn’t (successfully) get 400,000 people to keep a secret for the rest of their lives. If anybody knows that trick, tell the government and you will become wealthy – they have a lot more secrets they’d like to keep.
A large fraction of the Apollo project funding was spent developing the Saturn V launch vehicle and facilities:
http://history.nasa.gov/ap11ann/kippsphotos/69-H-1096.jpg
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/ksc-69pc-442.jpg
One million spectators watched, heard and felt the Apollo 11 Saturn V liftoff in person, with their own senses:
Were these 1,000,000 people also in on the conspiracy along with the 400,000 who worked on Apollo? Or did NASA spend $110 billion (2010 dollars) to develop a gigantic moon rocket which only flew to earth orbit?
The Soviets also had their version of Apollo, and developed and tried to fly their own version of a Saturn V, the N1, two of which can be seen here: https://archive.org/download/GPN-2002-000188/GPN-2002-000188.jpg They spent a huge amount of money on this. Were the Soviets also in on the conspiracy?
The visually obvious modifications are pretty trivial. The single biggest clue is the presence of the plume deflectors under the reaction control system thrusters. These are the four big black curved panels sitting on tacked on tripod like structures that are actually attached to the decent stage, but sit up in front of the ascent stage.
The early LMs were far from ready for a landing, and were all overweight. Famously Apollo 10’s LM was not really light enough to safely manage a landing and ascent. Not until Apollo 15, the first of the J missions, was the LM used light enough to allow the lunar rover to be carried.
I also vaguely recollect a similar statement about the Apollo 10 LM. However the actual reason it could not do a full landing is it wasn’t fully fueled – it did not have sufficient propellant. Whether this was due to the LM dry mass being too heavy, I don’t know.
However, each successive Apollo lunar mission used heavier spacecraft, in terms of total wet mass. I don’t have the LM-specific numbers, but the total spacecraft mass (combined CSM+LM) is in the Saturn V Flight Evaluation Reports in the vehicle mass breakdown tables at the end of the reports. These are available on the NASA Technical Reports Server, and various other places: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp
What enabled this was progressive uprating of the Saturn V combined with refined trajectory shaping and fine-tuning of margins.
I recall reading discussions about lowering the spacecraft dry mass on later missions, however I don’t know to what degree that was done or how anyone would get that data. But there is no question the total spacecraft mass was heavier on each successive mission.
I believe the booster upgrades and trajectory refinements are mostly what allowed each successive mission to use heavier spacecraft. Below is the wet mass in pounds of the combined Apollo CSM+LM spacecraft for each mission at time of S-IVB cutoff, as listed in the Saturn V Flight Evaluation Reports:
A9: 95,162 lbs
A10: 98,264 lbs
A11: 100,736 lbs
A12: 101,091 lbs
A13: 101,235 lbs
A14: 102,095 lbs
A15: 107,127 lbs
A16: 107,147 lbs
A17: 107,163 lbs
And to finish this post off, the 1979 HSCA conclusion of a probable conspiracy was based on flimsy piece of bogus evidence that was debunked shortly after the report came out. THAT’s why you don’t hear about it.
Of course the Moon landings were faked, what fools everyone is that they were shot on location … I went into this in great detail in my newsletter a few months ago … [sigh] …
In summary, the rocket launch couldn’t be faked, a million people could see it out their backyards. After that NASA didn’t have enough money to rent a Hollywood studio so they loaded all the props into the space capsule and sent it to the Moon, as that was cheaper than hiring a bunch of union workers to shoot the film here on Earth.
Pick up a few rocks and no one’s the wiser …
ETA: Seriously, look at the OP’s first picture … NO WAY is that union made …
Wow. Great photos. My heart still flutters looking at those.
Sorry about the hijack - and not intended as a political comment - but what’s really sad is that I was 10 years old when Apollo 11 landed, and I fear that by the time I die (probably about 25 years from now) people won’t have left LEO.
Readers of this thread will probably be interested in these links:
Curator’s Dilemma: Displaying the Lunar Module, about the National Air and Space Museum’s LM-2 (the one in the OP’s second picture), which has recently been moved into the museum’s main Milestones hall.
Smithsonian’s 3D digitization of the Apollo 11 Command Module
Read on this board a few months ago (poster unknown):
“You can’t reason a person out of a believe that they didn’t reason themselves into.”
That’s similar to another quote I like, “You cannot wake up someone who’s pretending to be asleep.”
I recently read somewhere (okay, I have to admit that it was a link on FB, but a link by somebody I trust) that if a person has a strong belief in something, such as a CT, then showing them counter-evidence only strengthens the belief. Someone looking directly at a graph showing the US unemployment rate over the last 8 years continued to insist that unemployment had gotten worse over that time. It really is a bit like a religious belief.