Apollo 20 hoax footage

[Ginnie]

bob said:

ginniegatrit said:

Bob B., you gotta admit these are small points though.

Yes. You asked for errors and inconsistencies, you didn't say they had to be big ones.

ginniegatrit said:

Wasn't the LM once known as LEM?

Initially, yes, but it was changed early in its development. Nobody around here refers to it the LEM because we all know better; I expect an even higher standard from a supposedly ex-astronaut.

I think someone already brought up the point about Earth not being able to get signals from the far side of the moon. That just about confirms the fakery right there I would guess.
I kept reading LEM in a book I have that was written in the sixties,
Is the blastoff in the video real?

[Bob B.]

ginniegatrit said:

I think someone already brought up the point about Earth not being able to get signals from the far side of the moon. That just about confirms the fakery right there I would guess.

Others may have talked about it as well, but I mentioned in Reply #54 of this thread.

ginniegatrit said:

I kept reading LEM in a book I have that was written in the sixties

Originally it was the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) but this was changed to simply Lunar Module (LM). I'm not sure when the change was made but all of the NASA literature I've seen from the late 1960s says 'LM'. I've seen 'LEM' in several books but they are generally from around 1965 or earlier.

ginniegatrit said:

Is the blastoff in the video real?

It's been nearly a year since I last watched the video, but as I recall, it did seem to be authentic footage from a real launch. I don't think any of us figured out which mission the footage was taken from.

[LunarOrbit]

Maybe they transported the rockets from Florida to California using China's underground tunnel system. The rockets could have even been assembled underground.

[PhantomWolf]

No, they transported them on the back of a 747 just like the shuttle.

[LunarOrbit]

hmm... I'm tempted to make a properly scaled photoshopped image of that, just to see what it would look like. But I'm worried the image would end up being used as proof.

[PhantomWolf]

You know when I said it I was being silly, but....

NASA aquired their first 747-100 for shuttle transportation in 1974
The Saturn IC stage is the largest and is less than 5m longer than the shuttle without the engine covers
The Saturn IC stage is the heaviest at around 33 tons dryweight compared to the Shuttle's 68 ton dry weight.

In theory at least it is possible, the major issue being that the IC was 10m in diameter compared to the shuttle's 4.6m (minus wings) and the 474's 6.4m widths. The certainly might cause problems, but hey this is NASA, they can do the impossible.

[Bob B.]

phantomwolf said:

The Saturn IC stage is the heaviest at around 33 tons dryweight compared to the Shuttle's 68 ton dry weight.

According to the numbers I've seen, the IC stage has a dry mass of around 130 metric tons.

[Al Johnston]

Boeing say 300,000lb, which is about 130t

[Count Zero]

To make matters worse, the shuttle has wings. It contributes lift to the combination - not enough to completely compensate for its weight (unlike the radome on an AWACS), but it is significant.

[sts60]

Maybe they transported the rockets from Florida to California using China's underground tunnel system. The rockets could have even been assembled underground.

(slaps forehead) So that's what Rusty's 100,000 Chines soldiers are doing while waiting to invade New York City! Underground NASA/CIA/NSA/NRO/FEMA/NFL cargo shipping! Well, good, I say - keep 'em busy.

[Nowhere Man]

LM was still pronounced "lem" by anyone involved with it back then.

Fred

[Obviousman]

nowhereman said:

LM was still pronounced "lem" by anyone involved with it back then.

Fred

Quite correct. It was written, though, as LM.

[PhantomWolf]

bob said:

phantomwolf said:

The Saturn IC stage is the heaviest at around 33 tons dryweight compared to the Shuttle's 68 ton dry weight.

According to the numbers I've seen, the IC stage has a dry mass of around 130 metric tons.

doh, serves me right for trying to work it out by adding together the parts listed in the artical I had, that and my maths is likely screwy today due to a presistant headache. at 130 ton, that would only leave 77,000lb of fuel for the aircraft, so could be a bit touch and go. Not sure how much you need to fly from Louisiana to Califorina

[tedward]

They are rockets? Pop them over from the factory and use the film set stunt giant cushion thingies to catch them?

[Count Zero]

That I would pay to see!