1st Manned Moon Landing - 45 Years Ago
Discussion
droopsnoot said:
The most compelling reasoning I heard behind the did they/ didn't they argument was from a NASA guy on something broadcast, I think, last year. The gist of it was that the Apollo programme involved thousands of people at NASA, tens or hundreds of thousands of people at suppliers, the news agencies, various federal agencies and government departments in the US, and the work involved in getting all those people to conspire to pretend there was a moon landing if there was not would be far more complex than just actually going to the moon. To say nothing of the cost of continuing to monitor all those people to make sure no-one lets the cat out of the bag later on.
On top of that I'm sure Russia would love to prove they hadn't gone. But, according to the wackos, they just rolled over and accepted America's word too.V8 Fettler said:
Mars by 1980?
It is quite interesting reading about Wernher von Braun, it was his book that had a mars landing set in the year 1980, given his advancement in making the V2 and then the Saturn 5, given another couple of decades and enough funding he could well have built a rocket capable to getting people to Mars, whether everything else needed to sustain people for such a long time would have been sorted is highly unlikely, but we could have had the vehicle to do it.As for other comments about a military use, i'm sure some of the rocket tech von Braun invented during his tenure with NASA has been used for military purposes.
kingofdbrits said:
It is quite interesting reading about Wernher von Braun, it was his book that had a mars landing set in the year 1980, given his advancement in making the V2 and then the Saturn 5, given another couple of decades and enough funding he could well have built a rocket capable to getting people to Mars, whether everything else needed to sustain people for such a long time would have been sorted is highly unlikely, but we could have had the vehicle to do it.
As for other comments about a military use, i'm sure some of the rocket tech von Braun invented during his tenure with NASA has been used for military purposes.
Von Braun initially worked for the US Army. He actually spent almost 50% of his US career with them - designing ballistic missiles (the Redstone/Jupiter family) and also the first of the Saturns - although the Saturn was never planned as a ballistic missile. As for other comments about a military use, i'm sure some of the rocket tech von Braun invented during his tenure with NASA has been used for military purposes.
The Army actually began to wonder what the Saturn could be used for and by 1958 were on the verge of cancelling the programme.
It was the setting up of NASA in 1958 that saved Saturn as the Army was only too grateful to dump Von Braun and his team onto someone else's fiscal responsibility.
Even NASA were not sure what good the Saturn might be - until Kennedy announced the lunar landing programme. Even then, Von Braun himself believed that the biggest of the Saturns (originally referred to as the C-1 and later the V) would not be big enough for the job and proposed an even bigger booster - the Nova.
lukefreeman said:
Genuinely interested in why people say it never happened......please explain why.
On PH, I'm guessing... a joke? 
Winding others up is a popular pastime round these parts.And if someone really believes in a fake, it isn't based on evidence, it's based on paranoia - a belief that no-one is trustworthy. Hence the lizards. So there's no point in display contradictory evidence, that just proves you're part of it.
Does anyone know why they went straight to a landing rather than a flyby? Maybe I'm just too sissy to run a rocket program (entirely possible), but I would have thought a manned flyby as precursor would have been worthwhile given the huge amount of extra complications landing and rendezvous required.
Looking forward to the next step, it seems a shame space exploration has stalled so. I suspect a fair few on here already have it but if not, kerbal space program is worth a shout and features a semi-cameo from Wernher von Braun
paranoid airbag said:
lukefreeman said:
Genuinely interested in why people say it never happened......please explain why.
Does anyone know why they went straight to a landing rather than a flyby? Maybe I'm just too sissy to run a rocket program (entirely possible), but I would have thought a manned flyby as precursor would have been worthwhile given the huge amount of extra complications landing and rendezvous required.Moonwalk One appeared on the haunted goldfish tank last night
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC-cyoqKjpQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC-cyoqKjpQ
V8 Fettler said:
Moonwalk One appeared on the haunted goldfish tank last night
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC-cyoqKjpQ
The sight of the Apollo V in all its glory is still awesome http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC-cyoqKjpQ
Silverbullet767 said:
Eric Mc said:
They did debate what flag they would use (or even if ANY flag would be used) but the idea of using a UN flag was dropped very early on because -
a) the UN had nothing to do with the project
b) the US taxpayer was providing 99% of the funding
Isn't it bleached white by now? It'll look like the French landed there first.a) the UN had nothing to do with the project
b) the US taxpayer was providing 99% of the funding
Edited by Jimbeaux on Monday 21st July 14:15
Jimbeaux said:
Grumfutock said:
Look, how the hell could there of been a moon landing? Everyone knows we are all just specs on the ball sack of a giant space monkey!
See, and they say interest in science is at an all time low!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff