Moon Landing

[NAKID]

Looking at it from taking off. How many delays due to mechanical issues have we had for launches from Earth? How could we even be certain we wouldn't have any of those issues while on the moon?

[Triple J]

Isn't there some really thick layer of radiation one must pass through to get to the moon? I recall that being another "theory" from this show I watched on the History Channel about seven years ago.

There is...the van Allen belt...a concern, but not as big of a deal as the FOX program you watched made it out to be.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#radiation

You should pick up the book Bad Astronomy Jud...you'd probably like it.

[cyrus buelton]

There is...the van Allen belt...a concern, but not as big of a deal as the FOX program you watched made it out to be.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html#radiation

You should pick up the book Bad Astronomy Jud...you'd probably like it.

I didn't watch the fox show on it  (I can't stand Fox News and I am conservative....)

I watched one a long time ago on the History Channel, but probably similar content and studies.


I will check it out.

Did you finish SpyCraft yet?

[Kopfjäger]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5380672/?gt1=43001

[Triple J]

Looking at it from taking off. How many delays due to mechanical issues have we had for launches from Earth? How could we even be certain we wouldn't have any of those issues while on the moon?

They weren't certain...going to the moon was/is risky business, as Apollo 1 and Apollo 13 demonstrated. The engineers just do their best to design around issues. Many astronauts and cosmonauts have died throughout space exploration history.

Submarines have been lost at sea...how can you be certain there won't be anymore issues?

[Triple J]

I didn't watch the fox show on it  (I can't stand Fox News and I am conservative....)

I watched one a long time ago on the History Channel, but probably similar content and studies.


I will check it out.

Did you finish SpyCraft yet?

Yes you did...Fox produced it or something, it didn't air on Fox. I saw the same program on the History channel or Discovery or something.

Not done with Spycraft yet...I don't have a lot of time to read. It's really interesting though! 

[Pakhan]

Looking at it from taking off. How many delays due to mechanical issues have we had for launches from Earth? How could we even be certain we wouldn't have any of those issues while on the moon?

we weren't sure, that's why it was a huge risk and that's why space exploration is a monumental achievement.  Look up the failures like Apollo 1, Apollo 13, also the 5+ Russian satellites to land on the moon that just crashed or the ones that didn't escape low earth orbit.

[NAKID]

Submarines have been lost at sea...how can you be certain there won't be anymore issues?

Subs are a little less risky, mainly because there are measures in place for rescue attempts if issues arise...

[Triple J]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5380672/?gt1=43001

[Triple J]

Subs are a little less risky, mainly because there are measures in place for rescue attempts if issues arise...

You missed the point. Everything carries a certain level of risk, which can only be managed at best.

[NAKID]

You missed the point. Everything carries a certain level of risk, which can only be managed at best.

No, I undertand your point, but I don't think it's a good analogy. There are measures in place for a sub mishap, NONE available for a lunar module mishap. The risk would be hundreds of times greater for that...

[Triple J]

No, I undertand your point, but I don't think it's a good analogy. There are measures in place for a sub mishap, NONE available for a lunar module mishap. The risk would be hundreds of times greater for that...

And those risks were minimized as much as possible, and then accepted. Space travel is, and always has been, dangerous. Everyone involved knows that.

Besides, this is a non-argument for why we faked the moon landings.

I have yet to see any evidence that we weren't there like we claim...and there is plenty of evidence for our being there. Another example is the mirror array they left so the earth-moon distance can be measured down to the inch...by the US, Russians, various universities, etc.

[Pakhan]

high risk doesn't make anything impossible or untrue

[Kopfjäger]

www.clavius.org

[superjohn]

Looking at it from taking off. How many delays due to mechanical issues have we had for launches from Earth? How could we even be certain we wouldn't have any of those issues while on the moon?

But look at how many Shuttle flights, not to mention other rocket flights that go off completely without a hitch. The Shuttle flew 100+ times with a scant few being delayed, aborted, or otherwise. Yes, we've been MUCH more cautious lately with launches due to the Columbia re-entry explosion. The fleet is getting old and with no new Shuttles planned, NASA is taking every bit of caution it can.

As for the analogy to Sub missions, I would say it's pretty good. Especially if you look at the ballistic missile subs that sit under the ice cap or in enemy waters. If they go down, there is no getting those submariners back.