Chinese rocket body breaks up in orbit after successful satellite launch

Space.com ^ | Andrew Jones

[Tom Tetroxide]

China didn’t develop its own ballpoint pen until 2017. IIRC, the ballpoint pen was invented in 1888.

https://www.businessinsider.com/china-has-finally-figured-out-how-to-make-ballpoint-pens-2017-1

[RoosterRedux]

If, as the Pentagon says, the Chinese have tic-tac drones that can fly at 50,000 mps, hover over our Aegis destroyers for many hours, and dive into the sea without a splash, why the hell can’t they design satellites that don’t break up in orbit?;-)

[Golden Eagle]

My father was an engineer on the Apollo design team.

Thanks for sharing, and I think this is one of the strongest arguments for it actually happening - that it’s too big of a project to keep it secret. But not sure how many would have needed to be involved in knowing if the astronauts just stayed in orbit the whole time, either.

[Golden Eagle]

Since the end of the Apollo program no person has ever left low earth orbit and we are told no further scientific data can be achieved by sending man back to the Moon.

I also find it interesting that any proposed rocket ship designs for going to the moon now seem to be much larger in size, and require significantly more fuel.

[Golden Eagle]

Once the LEM and capsule escape the Moon’s weak gravitational tug the ride is basically all downhill to Earth requiring no fuel.

Thanks for the detailed listing of the theories, which I am familiar with. But ~20% of the Earth’s gravity can’t be taken for granted. And 250,000 miles is a log way to travel with no fuel, whether there’s gravity or not.

[kosciusko51]

That’s because they want to send up more than a small lander.

More mass = more rocket.

[Golden Eagle]

Yet even the Hubble telescope isn’t strong enough to see what if anything is still on the surface.

[kosciusko51]

Again, not as much mass to send back, and the escape velocity from the moon is significantly less than earth’s escape velocity. So far less fuel needed.

[kosciusko51]

The Hubble is not designed to look directly at the moon, unlike the Lunar Reconnaissance Observer (LRO). The LRO has shown the landing sites and trails created by the rovers.

[Golden Eagle]

That’s because they want to send up more than a small lander.

Maybe because a small lander doesn’t have enough power to launch itself or a portion of itself back off the surface of the moon.

[kosciusko51]

Or maybe you are impugning the work of 10 of thousands of Americans who contributed tothe Apollo project, just because you don’t understand the physics and engineering required to do so.

[Vermont Lt]

The new plans involve taking a lot more stuff to the moon. And missions will be a lot longer.

Apollo was a little cruiser to see what was there. The newer ones are cargo carriers.

[Golden Eagle]

maybe you are impugning the work of 10 of thousands of Americans who contributed tothe Apollo project

Well, that’s the main reason this subject is considered taboo, isn’t it. But, I just don’t fully trust everything the government tells me,either. And other astrophysicists much smarter than me have raised similar questions, have they not?

If/when some is able to capture a modern picture showing evidence of our visit, the question will be answered. But the fact even that still can’t be done contributes to the uncertainty.

[kosciusko51]

I’ve already pointed out that the LRO has captured that evidence.

Furthermore, if it was a fake, the USSR would have called it out in no uncertain terms at the time.

[Golden Eagle]

As Reagan said, “Trust, but verify.” As it hasn’t yet been verified by optics in the modern day, my summation is “suspicious.” I have no idea, and truly hope it did happen, there’s just no proof of it, and a lot of questions remain. Starting with where did all the original camera footage go? I’m off to work, have a good day.

[kosciusko51]

Modern optics are on the LRO, which was designed to map the moon. And it has captured the sites.

[sonova]

Hu Flung Dung

[Campion]

The “original videos” didn’t all “mysteriously disappear”. The original low-framerate downlink of the Apollo 11 moonwalk was lost, probably accidentally recorded over, that’s all.

[Campion]

Yes, we haven’t left low earth orbit. Due to NASA policy, we didn’t have the heavy-lift rockets anymore. Soon, we’ll have not one, but two (SLS and Starship). If a special, large, very expensive ship had been needed to get to the new world, it may have been some time before anyone followed up on Columbus’ voyage.

[Campion]

The problem with the "astronauts stayed in orbit" theory is that the flight was tracked and monitored by third parties, both nations (esp. the USSR) and private individuals. All of them knew where to point their antennas to get the signal, and most of them would have immediately known (and publicized) if the astronauts weren't really at the moon.

You have to come up with some elaborate nonsense about the radio signals being bounced off the moon to cover that, but then there's this annoying speed-of-light problem (roundtrip to the moon takes 5 seconds!) to contend with.