Radiation

[JayUtah]

This path is deviated only slightly in inclination by all of the apollo missions.

If by "only slightly" you mean up to 30 degrees' difference in inclination (Apollo 15).  And if by "only slightly" you include the midcourse corrections to achieve the hybrid trajectory, a feature not shown on your diagram.  Keep in mind nobody in this forum is an Apollo novice.  You're not telling anyone anything they don't already know.  Speaking of which, how much training have you had in orbital mechanics?  I know, I know -- none.  And "I don't need to know the science blah blah blah."  Thing is, yes you do.  Orbital mechanics is counterintuitive.

Now if your point is to show how translunar trajectories interact with the Van Allen belts, you need to tell us what the inclination/axis of the Van Allen belts is for any particular trajectory.  Your video simplifies it all greatly.  Don't assume it's coincident with Earth's rotational axis.  This is something that's nontrivial even for astrophysicists.  Good luck.

[timfinch]

it turns out that the moon does not rotate the earth on an equatorial plane, rather it rotates on an elliptic some 20 to 30 degrees offset.  The Tran-lunar injection is designed to place the craft on the same plane to allow an intersect.  It seems the variation in inclinations of the missions is a function of that plane and nothing else.

[timfinch]

Unless the Trans-lunar injection point is from one of the poles then the path is through the heart of the VAB and the TLI is never more than a 30 degree inclination so guess what?

[timfinch]

It turns out that the claim of lowest radiation path through the VAB is horse defecation.  Planing up determines the inclination of the orbit and nothing more.

[smartcooky]

Unless the Trans-lunar injection point is from one of the poles then the path is through the heart of the VAB and the TLI is never more than a 30 degree inclination so guess what?

Only you "guess". We "research and find out things"



This is a rough indication of Apollo 11's trip through the VARB... notice that it went nowhere near "the heart of the VAB"... Oh dear, try again.

Now here is a young lady who has a better understanding of Apollo, orbits and radiation than most people, including you it seems. If you can be bothered watching you might actually learn something.

And here is a little factoid for you. Over the course of the lunar missions, astronauts were exposed to doses lower than the yearly 5 rem average experienced by workers with the Atomic Energy Commission who regularly deal with radioactive materials. And in no case did any astronaut experience any debilitating medical or biological effects. And beside, the Apollo astronauts were former test pilots. Flying to the Moon, radiation exposure included, was still a safer day at the office than putting an experimental aircraft through its paces in the skies above Edwards Air Force Base.

[timfinch]

Unless the Trans-lunar injection point is from one of the poles then the path is through the heart of the VAB and the TLI is never more than a 30 degree inclination so guess what?

Only you "guess". We "research and find out things"



This is a rough indication of Apollo 11's trip through the VARB... notice that it went nowhere near "the heart of the VAB"... Oh dear, try again.

Now here is a young lady who has a better understanding of Apollo, orbits and radiation than most people, including you it seems. If you can be bothered watching you might actually learn something.

And here is a little factoid for you. Over the course of the lunar missions, astronauts were exposed to doses lower than the yearly 5 rem average experienced by workers with the Atomic Energy Commission who regularly deal with radioactive materials. And in no case did any astronaut experience any debilitating medical or biological effects. And beside, the Apollo astronauts were former test pilots. Flying to the Moon, radiation exposure included, was still a safer day at the office than putting an experimental aircraft through its paces in the skies above Edwards Air Force Base.

does that look like the plane of rotation the moon takes around the earth? If it isn't then that is not the path the TLI takes.  Remember a launch is simply circling around the earth on the same plane as the moon and then expanding outward in an elliptical orbit.  That drawing was designed to confuse the mildly interested.

[smartcooky]

Unless the Trans-lunar injection point is from one of the poles then the path is through the heart of the VAB and the TLI is never more than a 30 degree inclination so guess what?

Only you "guess". We "research and find out things"



This is a rough indication of Apollo 11's trip through the VARB... notice that it went nowhere near "the heart of the VAB"... Oh dear, try again.

Now here is a young lady who has a better understanding of Apollo, orbits and radiation than most people, including you it seems. If you can be bothered watching you might actually learn something.

And here is a little factoid for you. Over the course of the lunar missions, astronauts were exposed to doses lower than the yearly 5 rem average experienced by workers with the Atomic Energy Commission who regularly deal with radioactive materials. And in no case did any astronaut experience any debilitating medical or biological effects. And beside, the Apollo astronauts were former test pilots. Flying to the Moon, radiation exposure included, was still a safer day at the office than putting an experimental aircraft through its paces in the skies above Edwards Air Force Base.

does that look like the plane of rotation the moon takes around the earth? If it isn't then that is not the path the TLI takes.  Remember a launch is simply circling around the earth on the same plane as the moon and then expanding outward in an elliptical orbit.  That drawing was designed to confuse the mildly interested.

Jesus Christ.. use that slab of useless grey stuff between your ears!

The diagram doesn't show a "plane" (Hint: Its a 2D diagram and the dotted line is not the orbit, its defines the most most dangerous general area of the Varb)

[timfinch]

It does not correctly depict the actual path.  It shows a south to north transit perpendicular to the equator which we know doesn't happen.  They probably drew it in crayon for children.

[smartcooky]

It does not correctly depict the actual path.  It shows a south to north transit perpendicular to the equator which we know doesn't happen.  They probably drew it in crayon for children.

You have no understanding of a 2D diagram

Incidentally, you do understand, don't you, that the VARB are not perpendicular to the Earth's axis of rotation (as a submariner, you should know that), and neither is the moon. The VARB are tilted with respect to the rotation axis by about 23°, and the plane of the Moon's orbit is tilted by about 5.5°. Think about it.

[Count Zero]

a radiation level of .47 mgy/day is not lethal and a 10 mission in such a background is well within the established safe limits.  I contend not that the mission itself would not be feasible, I contend because you could not guarantee that the mission would not encounter an SPE then it would be Russian Roulette.

The odds of dying in Russian Roulette are 1-in-6 per round.  The odds of a dangerous SPE aimed at the Earth in a given 12-day period is much lower than that.  By contrast, Many astronauts were recruited from the US Navy's flight test center at Patuxent River where, at the time, test pilots had a 1-in-4 chance of getting killed during a tour of duty (Chapter 1 of Tom Wolfe's The Right Stuff graphically describes this period).  Before circling the Moon in Apollo 8, crewman Bill Anders believed he had a 1-in-3 chance of not making it back alive.  Today, our culture believes in "safety first". Back then, they believed that great achievement goes hand-in-hand with great risk. A man on the moon was seen as the ultimate achievement, and they would not have shied away from ultimate risk.  As I have pointed out twice now, two of the Apollo astronauts died of possible radiation-related illnesses (bone cancer and leukemia).

Remember, I am not claiming the reported doses are deadly.  I am claiming the reported doses do not reflect expected radiation levels for cislunar operations.

I am not fixed in my position.  If any of you could give me a plausible reason for the unusually low mission dosages, I will discard my position and assume a new one.

So, if radiation was not a show-stopper, and you are willing to consider the possibility that your position is flawed, and keeping in mind that attempting a hoax is far more difficult than simply accepting known risks, then I repeat the questions that you have ignored twice before:

When you found that Apollo radiation measurements did not match your expectations for a lunar mission, why was fraud your go-to explanation?

Why is the global conspiracy more attractive to you than any more reasonable possibilities?

[onebigmonkey]

I am of the mind that if I could definitively prove that the apollo missions never left ELO it is entirely unnecessary to prove that the landing was faked as it goes without reason that it had to be.  Is it really necessary to know how the magician does a trick if you can prove that it is a trick?

And if the overwhelming weight of other evidence proves that they did leave LEO then would that demonstrate to you that perhaps your understanding of radiation is inadequate?

If astronauts can broadcast on live TV images of Earth that are provably accurate in every way? If samples returned by the people who took them are provably of lunar origin? If equipment planted by people returned data for years after it was placed? If photographs taken on the surface show features that are corroborated decades later? If probes from countries other than the USA show the presence of human activity?

Where does that proof leave your faith?

And to add my voice to those who have said the same: do not make the arrogant assumption that you are the only person who has ever looked into the Apollo missions. Don't assume that people here are arguing out of ignorance and have not conducted research of our own.

[onebigmonkey]

Now this is the path of the trans-lunar injection orbit.  Examine closely the path in relation to the equator and the poles.  This path is deviated only slightly in inclination by all of the apollo missions.

It is a generalised and stylised depiction of a TLI burn of many kinds. It makes no claim to be an accurate depiction of the all Apollo TLI burns, two of which are described in the article from which it came:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-lunar_injection

[Count Zero]

It does not correctly depict the actual path.  It shows a south to north transit perpendicular to the equator which we know doesn't happen.  They probably drew it in crayon for children.

I never liked that illustration; it's confusing until you realize that it shows only the altitude vs. angle to the magnetic axis without showing the motion around the Earth.  These three videos (based on the actual Apollo 11 orbital elements, which are freely available) show much more clearly how the spacecraft trajectory bypassed the most intense areas of the VAB:

[smartcooky]

This will be my last attempt.

This is a view looking, from the pole, down on TLI and TEI (note how the moon moves between them.. it was even longer for Apollo 17)


Now visualise tipping this diagram, so that the top is away from you and the bottom is towards you, so that you are looking at it "edge on"



Now you should be able to visualise the TLI line as it really is, not as a line at right angles to the the plane of the earth's equator (flat on the diagram)  but as a line that is coming towards you... the bottom of the line is further away from you, the top of the line is nearer to you.

If you don't get it this time, then I'm afraid you are unteachable, and incapable of understanding the limitations of trying to show a 3D concept in 2D (no worries, its a lack of capability that you would share with almost all other hoax nuts)

[onebigmonkey]

These three images are stills, or a montage of stills from Apollo 8, 11, and 17 respectively.









Apollo 8 and 11 show the north Atlantic, Apollo 17 southern Africa. None of these images show that they were taken directly above the equator. All three were taken shortly after TLI and the evidence is in the footage that proves this to be the case. I'll see if you can fathom out what that evidence might be.