Boeing, IBM, Douglas, North American Aviation, Grumman... just five major private industry players in Apollo who either are in on the fraud or else built stuff that actually worked for NASA because no-one told them it was a fraud, and were good enough to document their processes extensively.
IBM built and programmed the guidance system using the data given to them by NASA.
Boeing, North American and Douglas Aircraft built the rocket stages, which were designed by NASA under the direction of Wernher von Braun. Boeing were also the main contractor, given the task of building the LRV.
Grumman were apparently contracted by NASA to design and build the LM, and after they were satisfied it would work, they handed it over to NASA, who allegedly put it through its paces in space, where it apparently performed exactly as stated on the tin.
You know all this of course, but why would any of those contractors have known that all their hard work was just part of NASA’s plan to fool the world? The rockets first stage was the only part that had to work to a certain degree, as is plainly seen in the original live news broadcasts from the time of the events.
Ah, so according to you the contractors designed something that worked as intended, and gave it to NASA who intended to
not use it.
Why would NASA not want to use all the equipment as advertised if the contractors had built equipment that...worked as advertised?
After first staging occurs, we see no clear evidence to suggest that the second stage is working, or even still intact for that matter, as all we see is an indistinct glowing white blob, which the camera follows for a couple of minutes, before cutting to the animation. But as with most of NASA’s video footage, our eyes must be deceiving us, as the man reading the script tells us that everything’s working fine.
In the original live news footage of the Apollo 17 night launch, just prior to staging we see a bright red rocket plume, and then the camera switches to black & white. At the exact point of staging, there is a glitch in the transmission and a second later, we see the white blob with no sign of the first stage falling away.
It’s a real shame the footage never stayed in colour for just a few more seconds, as we would have had some indication as to whether that second stage was firing, or just what was left of the rocket falling back to earth, as is apparent in the Apollo 16 footage.
Can I just check, Cambo, are you a flat-earther? This is a serious question, because I want to know whether you believe the horizon is a real thing. So, for example, when a plane disappears beyond a mountain range or whatever, it hasn't crashed but simply flown over the horizon?
If so, do you understand that the process of launching a rocket into orbit involves travelling hundreds of kilometres downrange from the launch point. As a result, the rocket
must disappear over the horizon from the point of view of a person near the launch point. So what you describe as "the rocket falling back to earth" is actually the rocket continuing to climb as it disappears over the horizon.
By what reasoning do you assume that everyone working for, or contracted to NASA would have to be in on the fraud, including the cleaners? Did any of those contractors test the hardware in the environment it was made for? Those contractors would not necessarily have to be in on the fraud, and would not necessarily have built something that worked. They merely built something that they thought would work, because like you, they had complete trust in the science presented to them by NASA.
Come on, this isn't a trick question, is it?
Yes, the engineers tested equipment. Yes, prior to launch they tested it in environments equivalent to what it was intended to experience in space. And yes, the first use of the equipment in a real mission was also a test.
So, for example, the LM descent engine was tested on Earth. It was tested on Earth in vacuum chambers so that engineers could be sure they knew how it behaved in a vacuum. And then it was tested in space on Apollo 5, an unmanned mission. And then the astronauts were allowed to play with it on Apollo 9.
Come on Cambo, tell us, what exactly was it about Apollo that made a mission not possible. You've danced around this all thread and never given us a firm answer. Apparently the only thing you're convinced of it that somehow it wasn't possible to go to the Moon, but you won't/can't tell us why. This is about as rational as deciding which team you support in the Bundesliga.
