|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 1, 2005 4:39:45 GMT -4
If you double the speed of the footage, it exactly resembles movement on Earth. So astronauts moved slowly on the moon. People much move in really funny ways where you live.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 1, 2005 4:42:02 GMT -4
If they were really on the moon, they would be taking strides of 8-12 feet, and of 6 or so feet in height, which would take them off of the moon surface for 3-4 seconds at a time. So when you walk around you always take 1-2 metre long strides and bounce a foot off the ground?
|
|
|
Post by lordoftherings on Oct 1, 2005 5:03:48 GMT -4
I got a ways into the essay, and I can only say that your "history" is quite innacurate. You seem to have no background in space history, US or Russian, and the ways each country went about it. The original US manned booster, the Redstone, had been around for some time as an ICBM and had the nickname "old reliable".
Dear all, it is what is said to be reliable what is being questioned. Not everything said to the public was true. You can deduce this from the events that Rob Moore spoke about.
And about Rob Moore, not only him, but his father also worked on the secret part of the project. The author tried to contact him to speak about it another time, but Rob said he should hang up and that he is not allowed to speak even to his family. Unfortunately, no written data could be obtained from him.
James Beans, the author of this site, was his neighbour and best friend. He prbably does some mistakes on his own like assuming the einestein theory (I am not sure about it, though), but I do really value his humbleness, bcz even after these shocking events, two secretive sources (Rob and the project about space), he leaves room for gullibility.
I think he is very authentic.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 1, 2005 5:34:20 GMT -4
But there is no proof other than his claim to this, so how can it be taken as authentic? I could claim to know the nephew of William Pickering and have had him tell me that the Suveryor probes discovered an alien base on the moon, which was covered up. I'd have exactly the same authority as the people you are quoting, except that at least I used a name people would actually know in association with Surveyor. Without this Rob Moore coming forward and explaining not only who he is and what part he actually played, then explaining how it was done, all we have here is a supposed story of somene with no obvious connection to the program making claims that don't stack up either with physics or just plainly historically. To say that it doesn't gel with history because history is wrong is a cop out, and to say it does stack up with physics because physics is wrong will require some serious proof.
Without more than a claim, this can't be taken any more seriously thaty Hoaglands Alien moonbases
|
|
|
Post by lordoftherings on Oct 1, 2005 5:50:39 GMT -4
But there is no proof other than his claim to this, so how can it be taken as authentic? I could claim to know the nephew of William Pickering and have had him tell me that the Suveryor probes discovered an alien base on the moon, which was covered up. I'd have exactly the same authority as the people you are quoting, except that at least I used a name people would actually know in association with Surveyor. Without this Rob Moore coming forward and explaining not only who he is and what part he actually played, then explaining how it was done, all we have here is a supposed story of somene with no obvious connection to the program making claims that don't stack up either with physics or just plainly historically. To say that it doesn't gel with history because history is wrong is a cop out, and to say it does stack up with physics because physics is wrong will require some serious proof. Without more than a claim, this can't be taken any more seriously thaty Hoaglands Alien moonbases I understand your point, however, it is just different what is written in history books and what is real. There is also difference between a theory and its application. Anyhow, the author mensions dwelling places of the Moores and the mother of Rob Moore who divorced her husband. It should be easy to check up. Would the author put it if it wasn't true. If everyone knows the strangeness of Rob's father and that he was working something secretive, then , those neighbors , can be interviewed. The author would not have been stupid to mension places and details that anyone can prove wrong. I don't know, I do trust him. It is up to you not to believe him
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Oct 1, 2005 6:04:07 GMT -4
If they were really on the moon, they would be taking strides of 8-12 feet, and of 6 or so feet in height, which would take them off of the moon surface for 3-4 seconds at a time. So when you walk around you always take 1-2 metre long strides and bounce a foot off the ground? Since when has 2 metres been a sixth of 12 feet?
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 1, 2005 6:20:57 GMT -4
I understand your point, however, it is just different what is written in history books and what is real. There is also difference between a theory and its application. Anyhow, the author mensions dwelling places of the Moores and the mother of Rob Moore who divorced her husband. It should be easy to check up. Would the author put it if it wasn't true. If everyone knows the strangeness of Rob's father and that he was working something secretive, then , those neighbors , can be interviewed. The author would not have been stupid to mension places and details that anyone can prove wrong. I don't know, I do trust him. It is up to you not to believe him All this info is posted about somene not allowed to talk about it? Sounds a very clever move. Still regardless of details to such things, there isn't any proof that either of that actually worked on the program, it's only a secondhand claim that they did.Until there is a reason to take the claim fr something other the heresay, there is little reason to accept it as more. Even if the website creator truly believed the story he was told, he hasn't confirmed what he was told, so how do we know that this Rob Moore wasn't simply telling a tall tale he thought would make him look bigger in his friend's eyes? Where's the evidence that this guy worked for NASA and was in a high enough position to now anything about a "hoax"? In something as big as hoaxing Apollo you want as few people in on the hoax as possible so they don't talk, so those people are the one's at the top, and none of them were a Rob Moore. Without proof of who is is and what he did, his word just isn't worth squat.
|
|
|
Post by lordoftherings on Oct 1, 2005 6:48:09 GMT -4
I understand your point, however, it is just different what is written in history books and what is real. There is also difference between a theory and its application. Anyhow, the author mensions dwelling places of the Moores and the mother of Rob Moore who divorced her husband. It should be easy to check up. Would the author put it if it wasn't true. If everyone knows the strangeness of Rob's father and that he was working something secretive, then , those neighbors , can be interviewed. The author would not have been stupid to mension places and details that anyone can prove wrong. I don't know, I do trust him. It is up to you not to believe him All this info is posted about somene not allowed to talk about it? Sounds a very clever move. Read the site well. The author was speaking on the phone. Plus, Rob was married to a "spy" that would tell about everything he does. He couldn't speak on the phone, and he hinted at an old friend who was killed bcz he knew too much. He was his father's best kid and his father was preparing him to be a "NASA secretive person. " Rob's personality was different from his father. At tfirst he was talkative. He brought his friend to the appartment that his father owns or NASA gave his father for work (can't recall the site's info). His father blamed him about that, and after a while when he moved to work on the higher position in NASA, he was forbidden to speak to anyone. He just got how dangerous is the issue. Still regardless of details to such things, there isn't any proof that either of that actually worked on the program, it's only a secondhand claim that they did.Until there is a reason to take the claim fr something other the heresay, there is little reason to accept it as more. Even if the website creator truly believed the story he was told, he hasn't confirmed what he was told, so how do we know that this Rob Moore wasn't simply telling a tall tale he thought would make him look bigger in his friend's eyes? We know this bcz there is a second source of info, and from a top-secret report. That report confirmed what Rob has said. Besides, Rob showed his friend photos and declassified reports. The reports said that the Shuttle was the only true project. The author was his best friend. You don't lie to your best friends to show you are above them. Where's the evidence that this guy worked for NASA and was in a high enough position to now anything about a "hoax"? In something as big as hoaxing Apollo you want as few people in on the hoax as possible so they don't talk, so those people are the one's at the top, and none of them were a Rob Moore. Without proof of who is is and what he did, his word just isn't worth squat. Rob Moore worked on the secret part of the project, not any part. He and the few with him were allowed to mix with each other only so they don't leek information. Even his wife, she was from that group. They didn't want him to marry an "outsider".
|
|
|
Post by lordoftherings on Oct 1, 2005 6:49:28 GMT -4
sorry about writing between the qoutations. You can still read my reply in the quote.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Oct 1, 2005 8:25:02 GMT -4
During and even before the War with Germany the US used open and covert means to lure, or even kidnap, leading German scientists to come to America. I do not recall how Einstein came to the US, but he was originally from Germany. So, too, was Werner Von Braun, who I think came to the US after the war. After the war the US and Russia grabbed up the leading German scientist to further their own research.Von Braun and his team weren’t kidnapped, they escaped from the facility they were in s the Red Army approached and snuck through the front lines to surrender to the Americans. It was their choice to go. Although born in Germany, Einstein renounced German citizenship in 1896 and was granted Swiss citizenship in 1901. He returned to Germany in 1914, but never took back his German citizenship. He had three trips to the US between 1921 and 1932 and on his late trip decided to stay. Werner Von Braun was among the leading German-American scientists working on this project from the beginning in the very late 1940's. From that time, the late 40's to early 1950's Werner Von Braun developed the underlying basis of deep space travel that became the basis for the US space program, which has not changed that much to this very day!!!! It was in the late 40's to early 50's that Von Braun envisioned a use for these eXperimental Rocket Planes. He foresaw them being used as 'Space Shuttles' that could ferry up into space men and materials in order to build orbiting space stations far above the earth. This was Von Braun's, von Brain storm. But, Von Braun was a man well before his time.Wow this is just…. wrong. North American, an aerospace company, designed and built the X-15. Wernher von Braun had nothing to do with it. He was busy designing and building ballistic missiles for the US Army. The US military worked on building and perfecting the X-rocket planes and were met with one major technological and/or political obstacle after another. There were a number of previous X-rocket planes, but the X-15 was designed to become man's first Space Craft. It was to be the first man-made craft (rocket-powered, manned, manually controlled and designed for re-entry and landing) to enter outer space.Lol. Only the Air force and NACA were working on the X-Planes, not the Military as a whole. The Navy and Army were both far more interested in Rockets. Each of the X-Planes had a different mission profile; they weren’t a contiguous family of planes. The Bell X-1’s entire role was to achieve supersonic flight. The X-2 was to study the effect of super sonic flight on an aircraft while the X-3 was to test turbojet engines and different, shorter wing structures. The X-15 was not a Space Shuttle predecessor; it was designed and flown to determine information on thermal heating, high speed control and stability, and atmospheric re-entry. The only connection it had with the Shuttle is that NACA, NASA’s predecessor wanted it to be used to learn about re-entry because they were considering using the information towards capsules launched via a ballistic missile. It was designed in or around 1952-53, on paper. But, it had many problems. Problems with the rocket engines (there were originally going to be 2 or 3, very powerful rockets, but this had to be scaled down to 1 not so powerful rocket). Attempts were made all through the 1950's, 55, 56, 57. Pre-flights were made, but not using the engine full bore. When it was used full-bore one of it's missions was to aim for outerspace - and take it to the outer limits (or the twilight zone). The X-15 was designed in 1955 and the first flight of the X-15 was 1959. It never got into outer space either. Its highest altitude was 67.08 miles. Compare that to Spaceship 1 which reached 71.5 miles. That constitutes as Space under some definitions, but not outer space. Russia was far ahead of the US in ICBM technology. In the mid 1950's they proved this by successfully performing numerous launches using large and powerful rocket engines. At that time, however, the way in which the 2 countries conducted business was quite different. Russia did not publicize any of their attempts until after the fact. After they made successful launches, only then did the state run news agency release the films and disclose the work. But, in the US, each time the Air Force or Navy was to make a launch attempt, the press was invited to attend. One time after another, after another, after another, in full public view, with news press cameras running and reporters reporting, the US attempts failed. Some missiles never left the pad, they simply exploded. Some, just after leaving the pad, exploded. Others went off hay-wire after lift off and crashed in non-predetermined areas. It was an extremely embarrassing time for the US military. But, this embarrassment did not stop with just a few red-faces. It was costing the US very vital and valuable world influence and political alliances.No, the US had many successful missiles. The Redstone was highly reliable and become the base of larger missiles in time. The Navy Viking missile was also very reliable. They were also using one of the best early missiles, the V-2. There were some failures, but there were a lot more successes. In the 1950's Russia was clearly ahead of the US in the area of rocket technology.No, they just had bigger ones because their nukes were heavier and needed a bigger rocket. Also the US had more reliance on SAC and its bombers than on Ballistic Missiles, so the army and navy were the main rocket developers. In Russia, they had combined their space rocket research with their ballistic missile research and by attaching a 'satellite' to the top of a ballistic missile they were able to hurl it up and out into space. Before the US could even get a good ICBM off the pad, before they could get the X-15 rocket plane operating properly the Russians successfully launched 'Sputnik'. The first known man-made object to venture into earth near outer-space and enter into orbit about the earth. In the view of the world, the Russians were clearly the leader in this new and modern technology - Rocket Science and Space Exploration. The US was running a far behind second place. At this point, a no show second place. The X-15 project had more problems and was running more and more behind. (I can't recall the year Sputnik went up, or later dates for X-15's partial successes - 1957 ?).The X-15 wasn’t put into service until 1959, but then it wasn’t designed until 1955, unlike the claimed 1952-3. The Army had a missile capable of launching a satellite in 1955 but they were denied the opportunity to launch one, despite several requests. The US has choice the Navy’s Vanguard to do it and von Braun’s ABMA team was not given permission until after Sputnik 1’s launch. They took just 3 months to launch when finally given permission. Even though US scientists balked at the idea of putting objects on top of ballistic missies and hurling them up into space, even though they laughed at the idea, the word came down to blast something, anything, into space.This is just laughable. Von Braun’s entire life had revolved about putting something onto of a missile and blasting it into space. The only reason he hadn’t done it was because no-one would let him. He’d been arrested by the SS for wanting to do it and the US had banned him from even attempting it despite his repeated pleading. The real US space program was to get the X-15 rocket into space, then keep refining it until we could get a Space Shuttle that could take men and loads up. Now funding for that project was put on the back burner as more funding was spent on ballistic missiles and putting cargo's on top of them.Baloney. The US satellite program was set up in 1954, even prior to the Soviet’s one, and it was totally separate from the X-program. The Navy was running the Satellite program with Vangaurd, with von Braun’s Army team asking to help, while the Air Force was developing the Atlas for it and running the X-Planes. As to the X-15 being a precursor to the Space Shuttle, just by looking at them you can see its total hogwash. Finally, the US made a few ballistic missiles, we were getting somewhere. But not soon enough. The Russian's sent a dog into space. Oh God, they got a living entity into space first. The US was just starting to send our first satellites up.Bulldust, the US had plenty of Ballistic Missiles, including the one that would launch Explorer 1 (it had been taken out of –storage- and was being prepared for launch even without the permission to do it.) Sputnik 2 was launched within a month of Sputnik 1, it’d be a little hard to have suddenly developed a missile and launched in 4 months! Reality is that the missile had been developed over a year earlier and was stored for later use, hoping they’d get to use it. But, leading US space scientists felt that it was entirely too primitive and madness to think of putting a man, or even a dog, in a small capsule and put them on top of a large ballistic missile and then blast him off into space. Unlike an airplane - or rocket plane, there was no pilot, no manual navigation controls. It was just a big rocket blasting off at full bore, no way to maneuver it. US scientist felt it was too crude, too primitive.Hogwash. Von Braun wrote a book on how to do it in 1953. Manoeuvring a rocket is easy, you gimble the rocket engine so you can change the direction of the thrust. NACA was already looking into using Ballistic Missiles back as far as 1954, in fact the connection the X-15 did have to space flight was because of that. NACA wanted to know the effects of supper sonic speeds and the heat of re-entry on a capsule lunched from a Ballistic missile. Even though US space scientists objected and tried to thwart the efforts, the word from high command came down, 'Put a man on top of rocket and blast him into earth orbit'. They said, 'look, the Russians are doing it, they've done it, it works, at least for the publicity of it, for the 'political effects' of it, we have to do it. Put a man in a box and blast him off on top a rocket. Just do it.' So, that was the order. The X-15 project, however, was ready, about 5-6 months too late. The first US man in Space was not Allan Shepard. It was a pilot flying the X-15 into space and re-entering.Firstly, the US scientists were chomping at the bit to get a man into space. The politicians were the sceptical ones that needed convincing. At the time of Shepard’s flight Kennedy was close to cancelling the Apollo and Mercury programs. As to the X-15 being first into space, the official limit is 70 miles, the X-15 got to 67. But this depends on who you talk to the Air Force has a limit of 65 miles. Then we blasted up Glenn in a Mercury capsule and he became the first man to orbit the earth. He was not the first man into space, that was a RussianNo, Yuri Gagarin’s flight was the first to orbit. Due to having bigger missiles the Soviets could put their first capsules into orbit whereas the US had to wait on the Atlas as the Redstone wasn’t powerful enough. Glenn was the third to go into orbit after two Russians. But, this Uri,,, or whoever, the Russian, he was the first man in space. About this fact the US tried to belittle it, locally in the US it was known, it was mentioned, but when we sent Shepard and Glenn into space, that was, somehow, much more important, more valiant, more advanced.It was more advanced. The Mercury capsule could manoeuvre in space, the Vostock couldn’t. Also Gagarin’s Vostok couldn’t soft land and he had to bail out before it crashed. we sent Sheppard and then Glenn into earth orbit. This was called the Mercury project. However, some people question whether Glenn actually went up on top a rocket or if that was also faked. You see, the rocket used was not that reliable.There was more to the Mercury program than that, and both the Redstone and the Atlas was a very reliable rockets. John Kennedy shocked the world when he boldly announced that the US would put a man on the moon before the end of the 1960's decade. It was a bold statement, because in 1961 we had hardly even begun sending up rockets.Nothing bold about it. NASA had been working on it for the previous 2 years and knew they could do it. Von Braun and his team, after having had successful rockets for over ten years, were already committed to the Saturn program and were funded fully in January of 1960, Apollo was announced in July 1960. Kennedy was just finally getting in behind it rather than cancelling it. We had no idea how to go to the moon and what it all entailed. Think about it. Kennedy's statement that America would put a man on the moon was not based on scientific research. It was not the conclusion of an extensive feasibility study by a panel of leading scientist as to what was or was not actually feasible because at that time we had barely just developed a rocket that could carry a few hundred pound pay load several thousand miles. We had no idea how to go all the way to the moon and back. There was, however, a simplistic idea that all you had to do was build a big enough rocket and blast it off and it would fly all the way there. But, Kennedy's bold declaration was made entirely on the basis of political and military objectives. It was Cold War rhetoric.Absolute Baloney. Read my webpage on exactly this topic. And Chariots for Apollo is a good read on this topic too. Got eat, I'll continue later.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Oct 1, 2005 9:09:25 GMT -4
Rob Moore worked on the secret part of the project, not any part. He and the few with him were allowed to mix with each other only so they don't leek information. Even his wife, she was from that group. They didn't want him to marry an "outsider".
No. To put it charitably, that's not how secret projects work. To put it less charitably, that's just bad made-up melodrama.
Furthermore, Apollo was an almost entirely open project. The only classified part, IIRC, was the Chapel Bell data obtained from the S-IVB impact on the Moon. And, of course, astronaut's medical data (including data during flight) was confidential.
But this "secret part" is just made up. There's no obligation to treat seriously claims which are based largely on anonymous second- or third-hand allegations, for which there is no evidence, and which contravene the way things really work, supported by patently untrue "facts", as an alternative to a thoroughly supported and consistent mainstream version of history.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Oct 1, 2005 9:13:05 GMT -4
margamatix, phantomwolf et al,
I'd also like to repeat my request that discussions of astronaut motion on the Moon be moved over to the "Gene Cernan running" thread, so as to be able to discuss the bulk of lordoftherings' posts here clearly.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Oct 1, 2005 9:49:15 GMT -4
Even though US space scientists objected and tried to thwart the efforts, the word from high command came down, 'Put a man on top of rocket and blast him into earth orbit'. They said, 'look, the Russians are doing it, they've done it, it works, at least for the publicity of it, for the 'political effects' of it, we have to do it. Put a man in a box and blast him off on top a rocket. Just do it.' So, that was the order. The X-15 project, however, was ready, about 5-6 months too late. The first US man in Space was not Allan Shepard. It was a pilot flying the X-15 into space and re-entering.Firstly, the US scientists were chomping at the bit to get a man into space. The politicians were the sceptical ones that needed convincing. At the time of Shepard’s flight Kennedy was close to cancelling the Apollo and Mercury programs. As to the X-15 being first into space, the official limit is 70 miles, the X-15 got to 67. But this depends on who you talk to the Air Force has a limit of 65 miles. The X-15 did not beach the barrier of space before Alan Shepard. The US Air Force defines space as starting at 50 miles, and the USA has awarded astronaut wings to all the X-15 pilots who reached this altitude. A total of thirteen X-15 flights accomplished this feat. The first of these was piloted by Robert White and occurred on 17-July-1962, reaching an altitude of 95.94 km (59.61 miles). This was fourteen months after Al Shepard’s flight. The FAI (Fédération Aéronautique Internationale) defines space as starting at 100 km (62.14 miles). This is the altitude SpaceShipOne had to reach in order to claim the X-prize. Only two X-15 flights reached this altitude, both piloted by Joseph Walker. The first flight was 19-July-1963 and the second was 22-August-1963. The second flight set then rocket plane altitude record of 107.96 km (67.08 miles), which was broken last year by SpaceShipOne.
|
|
|
Post by margamatix on Oct 1, 2005 9:55:22 GMT -4
margamatix, phantomwolf et al, I'd also like to repeat my request that discussions of astronaut motion on the Moon be moved over to the "Gene Cernan running" thread, so as to be able to discuss the bulk of lordoftherings' posts here clearly. But the website which is under discussion on this thread is where the video came from> I will post the urls to the video in a new thread if it keeps you happy.
|
|
|
Post by lordoftherings on Oct 1, 2005 10:53:40 GMT -4
Von Braun and his team weren’t kidnapped, they escaped from the facility they were in s the Red Army approached and snuck through the front lines to surrender to the Americans. It was their choice to go. Although born in Germany, Einstein renounced German citizenship in 1896 and was granted Swiss citizenship in 1901. He returned to Germany in 1914, but never took back his German citizenship. He had three trips to the US between 1921 and 1932 and on his late trip decided to stay. Read well "I do not recall how Einstein came to the US, but he was originally from Germany. So, too, was Werner Von Braun, who I think came to the US after the war. After the war the US and Russia grabbed up the leading German scientist to further their own research". The author doesn't claim he was kidnapped. He says that Braun was, like Einstien, German. The author does not recall how Einstein came to US, but puts it as a suggestion that he was kidnapped. He doesn't claim this to be a proof. But just let me comment that surrendering to US is not done by his will. Werner Von Braun was among the leading German-American scientists working on this project from the beginning in the very late 1940's. From that time, the late 40's to early 1950's Werner Von Braun developed the underlying basis of deep space travel that became the basis for the US space program, which has not changed that much to this very day!!!! It was in the late 40's to early 50's that Von Braun envisioned a use for these eXperimental Rocket Planes. He foresaw them being used as 'Space Shuttles' that could ferry up into space men and materials in order to build orbiting space stations far above the earth. This was Von Braun's, von Brain storm. But, Von Braun was a man well before his time.[/b] Wow this is just…. wrong. North American, an aerospace company, designed and built the X-15. Wernher von Braun had nothing to do with it. He was busy designing and building ballistic missiles for the US Army. Again, the author claims him working on X rocket "Thus, rockets were the engine of choice for any purposed space vehicle. Later on the rocket planes became known as the X rocket planes (X = experimental), the most famous being the X-15. Werner Von Braun was among the leading German-American scientists working on this project from the beginning in the very late 1940's. " and not precisely X-15. See www.internetmodeler.com/2001/december/new-releases/book_natter.htm quote:"Loosely organized around the “goes straight up” theme, the book begins with good quality 1/72 drawings of three Werner Von Braun rocket planes, complete with speculative color side views. " The US military worked on building and perfecting the X-rocket planes and were met with one major technological and/or political obstacle after another. There were a number of previous X-rocket planes, but the X-15 was designed to become man's first Space Craft. It was to be the first man-made craft (rocket-powered, manned, manually controlled and designed for re-entry and landing) to enter outer space.Lol. Only the Air force and NACA were working on the X-Planes, not the Military as a whole. The Navy and Army were both far more interested in Rockets. O.K he means part of the military. Please don't be as such precise. I don't have the guts to go into every point Each of the X-Planes had a different mission profile; they weren’t a contiguous family of planes. The Bell X-1’s entire role was to achieve supersonic flight. The X-2 was to study the effect of super sonic flight on an aircraft while the X-3 was to test turbojet engines and different, shorter wing structures. The X-15 was not a Space Shuttle predecessor; it was designed and flown to determine information on thermal heating, high speed control and stability, and atmospheric re-entry. The only connection it had with the Shuttle is that NACA, NASA’s predecessor wanted it to be used to learn about re-entry because they were considering using the information towards capsules launched via a ballistic missile. Here I am not into all of this, so I can't argue about it, but I know that new things are built on previous knowledge. . It was designed in or around 1952-53, on paper. But, it had many problems. Problems with the rocket engines (there were originally going to be 2 or 3, very powerful rockets, but this had to be scaled down to 1 not so powerful rocket). Attempts were made all through the 1950's, 55, 56, 57. Pre-flights were made, but not using the engine full bore. When it was used full-bore one of it's missions was to aim for outerspace - and take it to the outer limits (or the twilight zone). The X-15 was designed in 1955 and the first flight of the X-15 was 1959. It never got into outer space either. Its highest altitude was 67.08 miles. Compare that to Spaceship 1 which reached 71.5 miles. That constitutes as Space under some definitions, but not outer space. "...To aim for outerspace" doesn't mean that it made it to outerspace. Russia was far ahead of the US in ICBM technology. In the mid 1950's they proved this by successfully performing numerous launches using large and powerful rocket engines. At that time, however, the way in which the 2 countries conducted business was quite different. Russia did not publicize any of their attempts until after the fact. After they made successful launches, only then did the state run news agency release the films and disclose the work. But, in the US, each time the Air Force or Navy was to make a launch attempt, the press was invited to attend. One time after another, after another, after another, in full public view, with news press cameras running and reporters reporting, the US attempts failed. Some missiles never left the pad, they simply exploded. Some, just after leaving the pad, exploded. Others went off hay-wire after lift off and crashed in non-predetermined areas. It was an extremely embarrassing time for the US military. But, this embarrassment did not stop with just a few red-faces. It was costing the US very vital and valuable world influence and political alliances.No, the US had many successful missiles. The Redstone was highly reliable and become the base of larger missiles in time. The Navy Viking missile was also very reliable. They were also using one of the best early missiles, the V-2. There were some failures, but there were a lot more successes. Are you speaking at the time the author was speaking? I have to read everything you said, however, I don't claim the author is a saint. All his own researched don't concern me, they don't make a difference. He may get things wrong, but I am interested in his friend's confessions. I prefer to go to my newly posted thread as this discussion, as I expect, will go nowhere. Let us concentrate on topics that we can find more evidences at. regards
|
|