Russia & India to send joint manned mission to Moon

Michael Petukhov wrote:
The limit in this case is that of the video clip involved
and I have seen this before at a higher definition.

So do I. I have bought high definition video tape in when
visiting US.

Then you have no excuse. All the well done high resolution
film and video sequences clearly show parabolic flight of
dust particles and settling at 1.6 m/s^2, the Moon's gravitational
accelleration.

The lower gravity makes the particles stay up in longer than
they would on earth; our gravity is 9.8 m/s^2 and people look
at the lunar stuff and think 'it's not falling fast enough,
it's got to be an atmosphere', but they're wrong.

As for me "clouds" of very fine particles of dust hanging
suspended in the air and as well as "clouds" of more heavy
particles concetrated in areas where they lost horizontal
speed (due to air resitence) and fall down almost vertical,

I see no clouds of dust suspended. On a surface like that
on any of the sand/dust deserts I have travelled you can see the
dust track for miles behind a vehicle.

Never mind. If you do not perhaps indeed you cannot.

If you take the velocity of the rover, the rotation rate
of the wheels, and how fast it could fling dust particles
up into the vaccum, then figure the math on 1.6 m/s^2 gravity
and how long it will take for them to land, you find that
you can show that for any point in any video, the stuff flung
up has all settled completely within that time. The bulk of
it is flung up a lot slower and on lower than vertical
trajectories and settles much faster.

That *is* clear in all the videos.

[Michkin book]
Among interesting things he said that by end of 1970 project
UR500K(proton)/L1 (known as Zonds 4-8 for public) was successfuly
4 times tested and were 100% ready for a manned mission
(if you do not know it was about the circling Moon and return),
but "high authorities" closed the program out of hands without any
explantions. By the same decision his OKB1 was given an order to
start urgent program of a space station for LEO. Moreover he,
the cheaf designer and the official Korolev successor said that
"the goverment decision was not clear for me then and it
is not clear for me now".

It was completely clear to everyone: Russia intended to participate
for prestige in a Moon Race. There was a time when it appeared
they could in fact beat the US program to a manned landing,
in the early 1960s. They got moderate funding then, and the US
spent lavishly on Apollo, with the result that Apollo succeeded
on time and the USSR N-1 rocket failed and the around the moon
Proton/Soyuz mission was cancelled because it would have come
well after the first US landings.

Anyone who insists that the reason for cancellation is unclear
is an idiot or too ignorant to be discussing the situation.

That's about all useful info on "Why we did not went to the Moon"
we can extract from this otherwise nice booklet. I have got
100% impression from his book he never even heard these words,
"the space radiation hazard". Not sure about astranauts but
russian cosmonauts seem were completely immuned of this.

You earlier referenced Guth's page on space radiation hazards.

The problem is, Guth can't calculate anything correctly regarding
space radiation hazard. He also sees manufactured structures everywhere
he looks in Venus radar imagery, calls himself the Global Aeronautical
and Space Administration, claimed for a time that a USAF laser weapon
test shot down Space Shuttle Columbia, and some other really great
lines. Brad Guth talks up a storm and knows a lot of technical
words, but he cannot calculate or analyze physics or space science
problems accurately. Period. Nothing he has ever done as original
work has been correct, as far as I can tell, and he even tends to
misread and misrepresent explicit answers from other people's
research.

Brad Guth is a kook. Trust nothing he tells you about the space
radiation hazard regarding Lunar missions. His claims on that
account are known to be completely wrong, because he can't do
math or science right.

Now, do you have any *other* evidence that we didn't actually
go to the moon?


-george william herbert

In article ,
(George William Herbert) writes:

You earlier referenced Guth's page on space radiation hazards.

Checking back through the killed files, it was, in fact, his sole
reference on the subject.

The problem is, Guth can't calculate anything correctly regarding
space radiation hazard. He also sees manufactured structures everywhere
he looks in Venus radar imagery, calls himself the Global Aeronautical
and Space Administration, claimed for a time that a USAF laser weapon
test shot down Space Shuttle Columbia, and some other really great
lines. Brad Guth talks up a storm and knows a lot of technical
words, but he cannot calculate or analyze physics or space science
problems accurately. Period. Nothing he has ever done as original
work has been correct, as far as I can tell, and he even tends to
misread and misrepresent explicit answers from other people's
research.

You forgot the Giant Metal Carbon Dioxide Dirigibles and the Venusian
Islamic Space Lizards.

Not something I'd bring before the Academy of Sciences.

Brad Guth is a kook. Trust nothing he tells you about the space
radiation hazard regarding Lunar missions. His claims on that
account are known to be completely wrong, because he can't do
math or science right.

IIRC, he's also been about the most consistant winner of the "Illucid"
rating from netkook.

Now, do you have any *other* evidence that we didn't actually
go to the moon?

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

"Stuart Wilkes' mom" wrote in message
et...

"captain!" wrote in message
news:cTbub.416666$pl3.294210@pd7tw3no...

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...


Sure. I am refering to dust clouds clearly visible in NASA official
Apollo 16 video under the title "Astronaut drives Lunar Rover"
which can be found at:


There are no dust clouds in this video.

The dust is thrown off the rear wheel and immediately falls
back to the ground with no plume of dust hanging suspended
as happens when you drive in desert areas on earth.

Keith


also, if you pay particular attention to the part where he slams on the
brakes at the end, you will notice the dust falls forward across the
wheel
well and onto the ground immediately.



Capn you got sucked into one of Petukov's psychopathys. I thought this was
about Russia and India...which one holds the lightbulb and which one turns
the ladder?!



i can't resist when space is part of the discussion.

"captain!" wrote in message news:kVSub.439029$9l5.262807@pd7tw2no...
"Stuart Wilkes' mom" wrote in message
et...

"captain!" wrote in message
news:cTbub.416666$pl3.294210@pd7tw3no...

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
om...


Sure. I am refering to dust clouds clearly visible in NASA official
Apollo 16 video under the title "Astronaut drives Lunar Rover"
which can be found at:


There are no dust clouds in this video.

The dust is thrown off the rear wheel and immediately falls
back to the ground with no plume of dust hanging suspended
as happens when you drive in desert areas on earth.

Keith


also, if you pay particular attention to the part where he slams on the
brakes at the end, you will notice the dust falls forward across the
wheel
well and onto the ground immediately.



Capn you got sucked into one of Petukov's psychopathys. I thought this was
about Russia and India...which one holds the lightbulb and which one turns
the ladder?!



i can't resist when space is part of the discussion.

Add on from a near-by thread: has the Hubble telescope ever found any
of the LEM bases left behind when the crew compartment lifts off?

On 20 Nov 2003 12:23:13 -0800, Jack Linthicum wrote:

Add on from a near-by thread: has the Hubble telescope ever found any
of the LEM bases left behind when the crew compartment lifts off?

No, it hasn't.

The Hubble Space Telescope does not have a large enough mirror to
resolve objects the size of a lunar module descent stage on the Moon.

The primary mirror in HST is 2.5 meters in diameter, and at the
distance of the Moon (about 400,000 km) it can theoretically resolve
objects 80 meters in diameter. The descent stage of the LM was
about 3 meters high and 4 meters in diameter, thus about 20 times
smaller than the smallest object the HST could resolve on the
lunar surface.


ljd