The Lost Cosmonauts book

This helps explain a lot, Giovanni. No, I'm not being sarcastic.

It shows me how much supposition can be based on such little evidence.

The Luna-4 spacecraft's design is well known. It was a firerunner of the
Luna-9 which did land on the moon and send surface images. Before the camera
could operate, the landing petals had to open, exposing the lens, and
antennas had to unfold.

Are you claiming that this sequence was activated while Luna-4 was
approaching the Moon? Has any member of the flight control team at the
Babakin Institute ever said this happened?

Viewed from the trajectory of Luna-4, which limb of the Moon was sunlit? Did
the J-C team ever try to determine this?

Frankly, I've tried to be as open-minded as I can be, but I find the claim
that this image shows the moon, from a spacecraft which (to the best of all
recorded history) could not take TV pictures in mid-flight, and from whom no
photographs were ever released by the Soviets -- is impossible to believe.




"Giovanni Abrate" wrote in message
...
To clarify: the image shows the lunar horizon twice. Because of the synch.
problems described in a previous post, the screen shows two images.
Looking
at the bottom image, faint shapes of at least one major crater can be made
out.
Gio.

"Giovanni Abrate" wrote in message
...
The picture is from the book manuscript, which is a photocopy.
The quality suffers, of course, although I don't think that the original
could have been much better.
Here is the link:
http://www.lusatomica.com/Service/luna4.jpg

Fair enough.
Thanks for your expert opinion.
I will gladly send you a complimentary copy of the book before it goes to
print, so you can prepare your arguments about its contents.
It is going to be a very interesting exchange, especially if we can get the
J-C brothers to come to the US.
Did you by any chance use your formidable contacts at NASA (no sarcasm
intended) to try and determine the identity of the fellow that showed the
J-C brothers around the Houston facility in 1964?
I think it would be very valuable if we could identify that person.
http://www.lusatomica.com/Service/NASA.jpg
Thanks and regards,
Gio


"JimO" wrote in message
...

This helps explain a lot, Giovanni. No, I'm not being sarcastic.

Frankly, I've tried to be as open-minded as I can be, but I find the claim
that this image shows the moon, from a spacecraft which (to the best of
all
recorded history) could not take TV pictures in mid-flight, and from whom
no
photographs were ever released by the Soviets -- is impossible to believe.

Giovanni Abrate wrote:

Did you by any chance use your formidable contacts at NASA (no
sarcasm intended) to try and determine the identity of the
fellow that showed the J-C brothers around the Houston facility
in 1964?

Did this individual not introduce himself to the J-C brothers before
showing them around?

Jim Davis

JimO wrote:


Frankly, I've tried to be as open-minded as I can be, but I find the claim
that this image shows the moon, from a spacecraft which (to the best of all
recorded history) could not take TV pictures in mid-flight, and from whom no
photographs were ever released by the Soviets -- is impossible to believe.


Note that the image is so blurry as to preclude the showing of any
identifiable surface features, which of course makes it very hard to
disprove that it shows the Moon....which, I assume, is why it was made
so blurry.

Pat

I'm not interested in the book, based on your 'best evidence' claims from
it. Thanks for the offer.



"Giovanni Abrate" wrote in message
...
Fair enough.
Thanks for your expert opinion.
I will gladly send you a complimentary copy of the book before it goes to
print, so you can prepare your arguments about its contents.
It is going to be a very interesting exchange, especially if we can get
the
J-C brothers to come to the US.
Did you by any chance use your formidable contacts at NASA (no sarcasm
intended) to try and determine the identity of the fellow that showed the
J-C brothers around the Houston facility in 1964?
I think it would be very valuable if we could identify that person.
http://www.lusatomica.com/Service/NASA.jpg
Thanks and regards,
Gio


"JimO" wrote in message
...

This helps explain a lot, Giovanni. No, I'm not being sarcastic.

Frankly, I've tried to be as open-minded as I can be, but I find the
claim
that this image shows the moon, from a spacecraft which (to the best of
all
recorded history) could not take TV pictures in mid-flight, and from
whom
no
photographs were ever released by the Soviets -- is impossible to
believe.

Jonathan Silverlight wrote:

Top posting, Jim? Shame on you ;-)
Two points occur to me. First, if the Soviets had got anything from
their failed moon probe, wouldn't they have shown it?
Second, did any of these Luna probes even have a camera capable of
imaging the Moon from space? They all seem to share the same design.


I've got a illustration of one (an E-6 class) with the parts labeled in
my "Space Probes" book (Kenneth Gatland, 1972, The Macmillan Company,
ISBN 0 7137 0573 6 page 39); nothing on the carrier bus is labeled as a
camera, nor does the carrier for the capsule appear to have any antennas
on it to transmit such images to Earth:
http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/l/luna9bus.jpg ,whereas the deployed
landing capsule has four rod antennas on it:
http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/l/luna9.jpg to transmit its images
from the surface. But these, as has been pointed out, are not deployed
until it lands and opens up, exposing the camera.

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote:

I've got a illustration of one (an E-6 class) with the parts
labeled in my "Space Probes" book (Kenneth Gatland, 1972, The
Macmillan Company, ISBN 0 7137 0573 6 page 39);

???

Wasn't the title of that book "Robot Explorers"? One of "The Pocket
Encyclopedia of Spaceflight in Color"?

Jim Davis

The J-C brothers are an interesting case. Let's side with Gio for a moment
and assume they were really pursuing this in good faith.

Could they have been the victims of a hoax? If the latter, was the hoaxster
likely a member of their own team or someone from the outside?

--
Dave Michelson

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 05:41:46 GMT, Dave Michelson
wrote:

The J-C brothers are an interesting case.

....Interesting? No. Mental? Yes.

Could they have been the victims of a hoax? If the latter, was the hoaxster
likely a member of their own team or someone from the outside?

[Insert scene of two drunk Italian Hams pointing a 4-by beam directly
at the J-C's garage, and reading from a Russian phrase book trying
their damndest not to hiccup or burp while the mike is keyed]

OM

--

"No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society

- General George S. Patton, Jr

In message , Jim Davis
writes
Pat Flannery wrote:

I've got a illustration of one (an E-6 class) with the parts
labeled in my "Space Probes" book (Kenneth Gatland, 1972, The
Macmillan Company, ISBN 0 7137 0573 6 page 39);

???

Wasn't the title of that book "Robot Explorers"? One of "The Pocket
Encyclopedia of Spaceflight in Color"?


I've got that but didn't think to check it. My source was "Solar System
Log" by Andrew Wilson, which has the weights of Luna 4 to 9. All very
similar. But even Luna 10, their first orbiter, didn't have an imaging
system despite being the same design.
--
Save the Hubble Space Telescope!
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.