Russia and India are Going to the Moon.

[swifty]

Didn't the US all ready do this before but with astronauts?

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

Let's just hope it goes better than last time.

[Jimbuna]

The Americans are far more advanced....this is how they get there now

[Oberon]

[bookworm_020]

Well NASA still has three complete saturn V rockets, so they could used them. They just have to take them back from the museum!

[Torplexed]

Maybe while they're up there they can take a few photos of the 1969-73 Apollo landings sites. It's been so long since the missions that nobody believes we actually went there anymore.

[swifty]

Originally Posted by bookworm_020

Well NASA still has three complete saturn V rockets, so they could used them. They just have to take them back from the museum!

\

You mean this thing that has been outside in the salt air for 25 years?

[IrishUboot]

Originally Posted by Torplexed

Maybe while they're up there they can take a few photos of the 1969-73 Apollo landings sites. It's been so long since the missions that nobody believes we actually went there anymore.

I, for one, don't.

[Onkel Neal]

Don't forget the Japanese!

.

[Reaves]

I've never given the 'moon landing was faked' conspiracy much thought but one thing does bother me. Why hasn't NASA used a telescope to have a look at the landing site and publish the photos?

Maybe the Japanese will put an end to the mystery. Personally I think it's an insult to the astronauts that people call them liars. On the other hand, if it was staged, the USA will not look good....

:hmm:

[Chock]

Anyone who actually believes the lunar landings were faked is a complete nutter. If the doubters knew anything about aeronautical engineering, they would be aware that building the BAC/Aerospatiale supersonic airliner, Concorde, was a far more technologically difficult task than building the Apollo rockets, do they think Concorde was faked too? And where do they think all the technology that made digital watches, pocket calculators etc possible, which started appearing not long after the moonshots, came from?

The Apollo moonshots were not as sophisticated as they could have been; had NASA had been given a few more years development time and the freedom to disregard the 'space race' with Soviet Russia it could have been a much more elegant operation, but there's no doubt they were genuine. Although, given the fact that most of the technology was based on German stuff from WW2 for both the Soviets and the US, that moon rocket probably should have had a Swastika on the side of it, the same is probably true of half the stuff on Concorde too:rotfl:

Chock

[Reaves]

I wish I had of flown in a Concorde, that would have been something to remember.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by Reaves

I've never given the 'moon landing was faked' conspiracy much thought but one thing does bother me. Why hasn't NASA used a telescope to have a look at the landing site and publish the photos?

Maybe the Japanese will put an end to the mystery. Personally I think it's an insult to the astronauts that people call them liars. On the other hand, if it was staged, the USA will not look good....

:hmm:

Artifacts as small as the Apollo lander (about 4 meters) - can't be resolved from Hubble nor from any ground-based telescope. There is a slim chance that the orbiting Japanese probe may be able to see a long shadow (sunrise or sunset).

About a year from now, NASA plans to launch the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter spacecraft. It's LROC system will be able to image the surface at 0.5 meter resolution, the best of any camera ever sent to the moon. The Lunar Module descent stage is 4.21 meters across so from directly above it might appear as roughly 9x9 pixels. The landing pads might also be visible. Shadows would make it bigger but it isn't going to be some high resolution image. For the last 3 missions, the Lunar Rover might appear as a few pixels parked close to the descent stage.

However, since it's a NASA mission any pictures it returns will be derided by conspiracy nutters as fake given the source. I've long given up changing any minds.

[Reaves]

Originally Posted by Torplexed

Artifacts as small as the Apollo lander (about 4 meters) - can't be resolved from Hubble nor from any ground-based telescope. There is a slim chance that the orbiting Japanese probe may be able to see a long shadow (sunrise or sunset).

About a year from now, NASA plans to launch the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter spacecraft. It's LROC system will be able to image the surface at 0.5 meter resolution, the best of any camera ever sent to the moon. The Lunar Module descent stage is 4.21 meters across so from directly above it might appear as roughly 9x9 pixels. The landing pads might also be visible. Shadows would make it bigger but it isn't going to be some high resolution image. For the last 3 missions, the Lunar Rover might appear as a few pixels parked close to the descent stage.

However, since it's a NASA mission any pictures it returns will be derided by conspiracy nutters as fake given the source. I've long given up changing any minds.

Well that answered my question. Cheers!

I'll have to visit Nasa Tv more often when that operation starts up.

[Foxtrot]

Originally Posted by Chock

And where do they think all the technology that made digital watches, pocket calculators etc possible, which started appearing not long after the moonshots, came from?

Alien tech. from crash sites? :hmm:

[Chock]

Oh yeah that's right, I forgot that the US has several crashed flying saucers. Klaatu, Baraada, Ni... Erm, Nickel, Necktie... Noodle.... It was definitely an N-word.....:rotfl:

Chock