A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 25th 09, 07:10 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!

On Jun 24, 6:14*am, Jack wrote:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap090622.html

"The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is scheduled to orbit and
better map the Moon, search for buried and hidden ice, and return many
high resolution images.

Some images will be below one meter in resolution and include images
of historic Apollo landing sites."


Should we start holding our breath?

~ BG
  #2  
Old June 25th 09, 08:10 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!

On Jun 24, 6:14*am, Jack wrote:
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap090622.html

"The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is scheduled to orbit and
better map the Moon, search for buried and hidden ice, and return many
high resolution images.

Some images will be below one meter in resolution and include images
of historic Apollo landing sites."


You folks do realize that this deployment of merely .528% payload
(including the spent upper stage) took 4.5 days getting into lunar
orbit. Does this not ring any bells, as to what it took for getting
all of an Apollo mission into lunar orbit within nearly a day shorter?

~ BG
  #3  
Old June 25th 09, 10:34 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
[email protected][_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 208
Default To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!

On Jun 25, 12:10 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jun 24, 6:14 am, Jack wrote:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap090622.html


"The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is scheduled to orbit and
better map the Moon, search for buried and hidden ice, and return many
high resolution images.


Some images will be below one meter in resolution and include images
of historic Apollo landing sites."


You folks do realize that this deployment of merely .528% payload
(including the spent upper stage) took 4.5 days getting into lunar
orbit. Does this not ring any bells, as to what it took for getting
all of an Apollo mission into lunar orbit within nearly a day shorter?

~ BG


Hi
It means they spent more fuel on humans that have limited time in
space
compared to an unmanned probe that can take its time and use less
fuel.
There is nothing here, just economics .
Dwight
  #4  
Old June 25th 09, 10:47 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Curtis Croulet[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 100
Default To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!

Hi
It means they spent more fuel on humans that have limited time in
space
compared to an unmanned probe that can take its time and use less
fuel.
There is nothing here, just economics .
Dwight


Never resort to a simple, logical explanation when an involved conspiracy
can be substituted.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California

  #5  
Old June 26th 09, 05:59 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!

On Jun 25, 2:47*pm, "Curtis Croulet"
wrote:
Hi
It means they spent more fuel on humans that have limited time in
space
compared to an unmanned probe that can take its time and use less
fuel.
There is nothing here, just economics .
Dwight


Never resort to a simple, logical explanation when an involved conspiracy
can be substituted.
--
Curtis Croulet
Temecula, California


Never put your brown nose in another butt-crack, because you never
know what else has been in that butt-crack.

~ BG
  #6  
Old June 26th 09, 06:57 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris.Bee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 367
Default To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!

On Jun 26, 6:59*am, BradGuth wrote:

Never put your brown nose in another butt-crack, because you never
know what else has been in that butt-crack.

*~ BG


Sound advice, from our gardening expert, there.

Planted deep in fresh horse compost.
  #7  
Old June 26th 09, 05:56 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!

On Jun 25, 2:34*pm, " wrote:
On Jun 25, 12:10 pm, BradGuth wrote:



On Jun 24, 6:14 am, Jack wrote:


http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap090622.html


"The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is scheduled to orbit and
better map the Moon, search for buried and hidden ice, and return many
high resolution images.


Some images will be below one meter in resolution and include images
of historic Apollo landing sites."


You folks do realize that this deployment of merely .528% payload
(including the spent upper stage) took 4.5 days getting into lunar
orbit. *Does this not ring any bells, as to what it took for getting
all of an Apollo mission into lunar orbit within nearly a day shorter?


*~ BG


Hi
*It means they spent more fuel on humans that have limited time in
space
compared to an unmanned probe that can take its time and use less
fuel.
There is nothing here, just economics .
Dwight


But LOR used 4 times as much fuel/kg, and it still took more than a
day longer to get there.

~ BG
  #8  
Old June 26th 09, 06:48 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris.Bee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 367
Default To all those sad people who still doubt the moon landings!

On Jun 26, 6:56*am, BradGuth wrote:

But LOR used 4 times as much fuel/kg, and it still took more than a
day longer to get there.

*~ BG


I didn't know they went to the Moon in Lord of the Rings... ?

Was that in the director's cut?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
moon landings Leff T Wright Amateur Astronomy 16 July 12th 08 09:55 PM
Slightly OT Moon landings. Brian Gaff Space Shuttle 12 July 28th 06 01:03 PM
Moon landings [email protected] Science 9 September 12th 05 10:44 PM
moon landings were a hoax [email protected] Policy 8 July 28th 05 10:06 PM
Moon Landings - Did NASA lie ? lheureuxph Misc 46 August 25th 04 06:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.