Видео

What would carry the dust given that they are in a vacuum?

The US will land even earlier, 2027-8, with Artemis 3

لا سيهبط العراق 😂😂​@@archierush868

It’s real. Theres tons of evidence from 1st, 2nd and 3rd party sources which have confirmed it’s real.

@@archierush868 none of that is truly evidence, we are made to believe it’s evidence but it proves nothing other than it not being hard to get a group of people to go along with a lie, Artemis answered all of the questions I had about the other missions

@@GucciP777if it was faked, the Soviets would have seen it and called the US out. They never did. It’s real

​@@GucciP777"none of that is truly evidence" None of what? You don't even know what evidence he is referring to and you've decided it's no good.

Apollo by the numbers by Richard W. Orloff. Read it

They are there, they are just too dim to see since the sun is very bright and the reflected light off the surface of the moon is still too bright.

"How was space travel more important to the world back then?" Cold war.

If you took ten minutes to check the facts you’d find that the engine would be at very low power setting at this late stage and is actually shut off 10 feet above the surface.

The engines exhaust wasn’t all focused into a small area. The second it left the engine bell, it made a sort of mushroom cap shape without the stem because the typical rocket exhaust we see is from the atmosphere pushing into the surprisingly low pressure exhaust of around 0.6 atm, but in a vacuum, this expands almost immediately and spreads out the exhaust to be very wide. It’s kinda like why helicopters don’t excavate a hole when they land as they use the propellers to push air down in a very large area and if it’s all focused into a smaller area, it would disrupt the earth

The LM's engine was throttleable; at landing it was putting out about 3000 lbs, not 10,000. And given the area of the bell, the pressure would only have been 1 pound per square inch (and as peteconrad points out, that was well above the surface).

Yes. The suit bends because of flexible joints which allow it some movement. The fact that it’s only pressurised to 7psi, about a quarter the pressure of a bicycle inner tube also helps. Facts. You should try reading some books b

Then you must think that all those spacewalk from the ISS are bogus, too, since they're also able to bend their arms.

But you can’t tell us why it looks fake for some strange reason.

What about it looks fake to you?

Because the ascent engine is firing on top of the descent stage. There also is a little bit of dust.

@@archierush868 if it is that case, the engine is not strong enough to lift it up. do not cheat yourself

There is not vibrations and air flow showing when lifting, and the camera is moving horizontaly , it is because of the height is limited in the studio

@@fzuray " the engine is not strong enough to lift it up." How do you figure? Can you please show your math? (The ascent stage put out about 3500 pounds of thrust IIRC.)

@@fzuraythe ascent stage produced around 3,500lbs of thrust. The lunar landers ascent stage weight around 11,000lbs… On earth. On the moon, it would be 1/6th of that or around 1,800lbs on the moon since weight and mass are two different things. Mass is how much you weigh regardless of gravity, weight DOES include gravity.

He was say that it was impossible for him to explain to the girl why the US didn’t send people to the moon after 1972.

@@archierush868 On other occasions, Buzz Aldrin has already told another audience that they did not visit the Moon. YT search...

@@mi1r2Apollo by the numbers by Richard W. Orloff

@@mi1r2 : Nope. he did not. But it's telling that you can't link any full interview. Why is that? Obviously you're trying to hide something.

@@kitcanyon658 Next to the video, there is the entire interview from which this part was cut. He has said these before other audiences. His words should be taken seriously. Man did not walk on the moon with the Apollo program. BUT they went there in a different form, which is still secret.

This was the second EVA they did, and one of the astronauts already got out first and started recording the other one

You mean the single astronaut coming down and then closing the hatch behind him? Did you not even do basic research to realize there were two astronauts? LOL Clearly you're a flat earther, with an IQ like that.

That's Edgar Mitchell coming down the ladder; Alan Shepard is operating the camera, he came out first. I'm guessing you made no effort to figure that out.

They were twisting it into the pole. Every time it “flutters in the wind” an astronaut touches it. It doesn’t move before liftoff and it’s the exhaust that causes it to flutter there

That is NOT how flags wave in a breeze on Earth.

Twisting motion causes the flag to sway. It doesn’t move an inch just before liftoff

@@archierush868 Açıklama mantıklı...Teşekkürler....

There is no footage from outside the lander during the landing. Theres only 3 videos of the takeoff from the surface, and it’s only for Apollo 15,16 and 17. Apollo 15,16 and 17 also had a rover which had a remotely controlled camera. You don’t need internet to record videos, and they already knew how to broadcast footage live, TV did that for years in the 50’s.

LOL. What a retard...and that's putting is nicely. Flat earther, right?

It’s small and thin to reduce weight. The margin of safety for rockets today is around 110%. Cars are like 700-1000%, meaning parts are made to withstand up to 7X extra pressures. This adds a lot of weight which cannot be spared for rockets and so the lunar lander was made as light as they could physically make it. It’s also not that small. It’s i think 7M or around 21ft tall from legs to top of the ascent stage and 5M or 15ft wide.

They (meaning hoax-tards like you) not know science. Learn how to write, son. You're an embarrassment. And no, the earth isn't flat.

Maybe if you’d stayed at school occasionally you’d have the capacity to understand it. You might also have the ability to write without putting man at the end of each sentence like a retard.

Look at the flag just before liftoff. No “wind” caused by twisting the flag into the pole making it sway

LOL.>That's all you've got? Jesus, I've met some dumb flatters but you're high on their list, aren't you?

Real

​@@archierush868really fake 😂😂

@@victor-ib1jnapollo by the numbers by Richard W. Orloff. 300+ page PDF of all crewed apollo missions, what they did, when they did them and even dates for when every piece of each rocket was delivered

Yes, maybe. The flag is still there, but it may be completely white now because the UV radiation would have basically bleached the flag white, so now it probably looks like we surrendered on the moon.

If you do not understand the very basics of science, perhaps you should ask and learn rather than childishly yelling fake.

Trajectory plots, onboard radar, telemetry calculations, and maneuver thrusters.

​@@blackhawk7r221 Еще раз повторяю. Вы верите, что возможно с первого раза шесть раз слетать, сесть на Луну и затем вернуться? Если вы в это верите, то попробуйте шесть раз попасть в летящую муху. Запросто? Какой радар, какие расчеты? Разве они при том оснащении помогут? Повторяю, надо выровнять скорости до значений, исключающих жесткую сцепку. При этом надо было выровнять положение по углу, чтобы сработали захваты. Какая должна быть скорость при стыковке? 0,5 м/с, 1 м/с? Какой радар даст вам такую точность скорости сближения? И я не случайно упомянул, что все происходит в вакууме. На воздухе, если немного ошибся, аэродинамика за счет торможения может сгладить ошибку. Здесь же, чтобы, к примеру, остановить вращение, необходимо дать точный импульс, иначе либо начнет вращать в другую сторону, либо продолжит вращение в прежнем направлении. Они же были в скафандрах, управлять в них очень сложно, пальцы рук сжать невозможно. И вот им в таком положении, не зная, где находятся, где корабль-матка, приходилось решать эти сложные задачи. Не хочу более утомлять вас своей писаниной, но запомните, что дьявол кроется в деталях. Если вы занимались проектированием, разработкой и испытанием новых изделий, то вам это будет понятно. P.S. Повторяю, это мое мнение, и его я не хочу кому-либо навязывать.

“Looks” fake. That doesn’t mean it is fake. You want proof? Apollo by the numbers by Richard W. Orloff

@@archierush868 I get it Archie. No disrespect. I was always a believer, but why isnt there current vids and pics of the landing sites? We have equipment on Mars, Why not the moon?

⁠@@sambuvca22The US, to my knowledge, doesn’t have any unmanned rovers on the moon mainly because they didn’t have the funds and also didn’t need to since they had a lot of moon rocks, so there isn’t any pictures today from the ground. There are pictures from orbit which does show the landers and the rovers tracks for some of the missions. Other nations have landed on the moon with rovers but they haven’t landed anywhere near the landing sites because they’ve already been explored and theres no need to go there.

@@archierush868 Ive seen the pictures from orbit.. Thank you for your input tho sir

It's not fake. If you think it's fake, that just makes you a sheep.

Did you read Apollo by the numbers by Richard W. Orloff?

@@archierush868 main ingredients to an apollo lunar module = tent poles, gold wrapping foil and duct tape

@@watchtheirhands3346it was made of kapton, mylar, aluminum, nickel foil, glass wool, titanium, and gold foil which is what most of the lander was made of.

@@archierush868 and where did they fit in that big heavy dunebuggy thingy? maybe it was blow-up??

@@watchtheirhands3346foldable and only used on the last 3 missions, not all of them. Heres how it unfolded ruclips.net/video/_TDwdYPOppM/видео.htmlsi=5jWZqIt3plEtuFqj

Twisting motion causes the flag to sway. You just so happen to ignore how the flag is completely stationary just before liftoff

What footage is fake? Prove the footage you claim as fake to actually be fake. Or, you are stupid. Thanks.

🤡

Antenna. It ends around 2 feet above them and isn’t perpendicular to the ground as you would see on a cable.

They didn't lose anything. You are misinformed and ignorant. Do your research.

You certainly _could_ be a flat-earther.

they faked it, in the competition with russia, for usa supremacy

​@@dananjaya8332 Then why did Russia track all the moon missions, and how do they still have the radar telemetry today if it was fake? Why would Russia say it's real, but you say it's fake? France and Great Britain also tracked the missions using radar. If you realized how stupid you seem, you would stop being stupid. But, you conspiratards ignore all reality and make up fantasies for yourselves.

Lame joke.

Proof or you are stupid. Thanks

Slow-motion cameras back then can only record for 30-60 seconds before they run out of film, so it’s not slow motion video. You are linking soo many things together which only has the year being the only thing that links them. I can just as easily say that the end of WW1 caused the Spanish Flu, despite the only thing in common with them being the year they happened, 1918. Concord first flew 2nd March 1969 747 first flew 9th of February, and wasn’t designed first to be a Cargo plane but instead was to ferry people. Apollo was announced in 1962, and there were two manned missions around the moon before Apollo 11, Apollo 8, December 1968 which was before both aircraft flew, and Apollo 10, May 1969. But, you still haven’t answered to why the Soviets said the landings were real since they also had satellites orbiting the moon and if it was faked, they wouldn’t see anything and tell the world the US lied. They never did this, cuz they saw the landers. There is no universe that exists where the US lied about the landings, the Soviet orbiters saw they never lander, and not tell the world???

Clown dumps a bunch of old and previously debunked misinformation, gets called out and asked simple common sense questions, and never returns. Typical conspiratard. 🤡

Except the calls of congrats from the USSR Academy of Science, the Soviet Premier, the cosmonauts. Hell, they tracked it.

Ignorant

​@@nunya_biznizsaid by an ignorant

​@@victor-ib1jnproof that it's fake or you are stupid. Thanks

Read Apollo by the Numbers by Richard W. Orloff

Source?

So fake that the Soviets tracked it then called to congratulate.

Proof or you are stupid.

look at the ship, how they managed to return to the earth, fight against moon gravity, we never been that far from the earth, even the iss