Moon landings: Fact or fiction?

Re: Moon landings: Fact or fiction?

But even so, his point still stands. All of the objections to the logic of "putting a man on the moon" hold just about as well for "putting relatively sensitive pieces of equipment on the moon" which the soviets had claimed to have done.

As far as I'm concerned, it is to me a given that either they -both- were lying, or they -both- did what they say they did.

Having trumped the soviets by putting a person on the moon, and having the cold war end before it was feasible to top -that- (by establishing some kind of permanant structure on the moon) the sheer lack of any useful reason to bother going back is why nobody has gone back.

Re: Moon landings: Fact or fiction?

It really isn't that hard. Basic newtonian physics can be used for the flight plan.

If anything, the most dangerous part of the mission that noone ever mentions is flying through the debris belt in the upper atmosphere. Screw the radiation belt, that's not even a threat. There is so much **** floating around in the upper atmosphere at speeds of over 25,000 mph. As I recall a mission almost went catastropic once when the shuttle was hit by a mere paint chip >_>. I think they track most of the known debris with computers now, but even then it's literally a gamble every time the shuttle goes up because of this stuff. It's kind of hard not to run into these foam problems when the shuttle is being blasted by ****.


Also yea, as devonin said, there is no reason to go back to the moon anymore. Unless of course they go ahread with the lunar base plans.

Re: Moon landings: Fact or fiction?

o =(