Hi,
allancw. A belated welcome to the board. I am a space systems engineer who has worked with a number of Apollo engineers, and have a certain amount of interest and familiarity with "hoax" claims.
Everyone seems to agree that the Van Allen Belts were potentially dangerous to the astronauts. Therefore, all the Apollo missions must have taken this into account, i.e., the launches timed and the flight trajectories carefully plotted so the astronauts would not be 'dosed.'
I'll assume this is a given, from the above posts.
Mostly correct. The trajectory design and timing were carefully managed to
minimize the exposure to geomagnetically trapped particles. The question was not whether the crews would get a dose, but
how much of a dose. The doses were measured and found to be quite acceptable - see
Biomedical Results of Apollo.
Therefore there surely are CONTEMPORANEOUS reports/accounts/papers/studies/documents proving this, or at least MENTIONING IT. Just to be sure you understand: when I say 'contemporaneous' I mean dated from the time of the missions, not some Youtube video or verbal claim from the 21st century.
There are. Some have been provided to you already. Below are excerpted some more examples.
I am saying, actually guaranteeing, that none of you can come up with the above, and for this reason: The Apollo missions were hoaxes.
So that's my 'proof': You cannot produce the stated evidence, which you surely could produce if the missions were done with the Van Allen Belt taken as a serious risk factor...
Your "proof" is demonstrably incorrect. You guaranteed such materials did not exist. What are the terms of your guarantee?
NASA TN-D-7080,
Apollo Experience Report: Protection Against RadiationThe problem of protection against the natural radiations of the Van Allen belts was recognized before the advent of manned space flight. The simplified solution is to remain under the belts (below an altitude of approximately 300 nautical miles) when in earth orbit and to traverse the belts rapidly on the way to outer space. In reality, the problem is somewhat more complex...
Raymes, Frederick (North American Aviation, Inc.). "Apollo Spacecraft Nuclear Radiation Protection Status Report", NASA SP-71,
Second Symposium on Protection Against Radiation in Space
, 1964.
If one considers only the lunar mission during which the spacecraft slices through the more intense regions of the trapped radiation belts for a duration in the order of 20 minutes, the belts present no serious problem t,o the astronauts as long &s they are residing in t’he CSM. Calculations have been performed for various mission modes which require CSM-LEM docking during transition through the trapped radiation belts. It was found that the astronauts could not be permitted to enter the LEM adapter, nor the LEM, for 10 to 20 minutes after injection into the trsnslunar phase. Mission operations & procedures have been worked out which will not require the astronauts to leave the CSM for at least that time period after injection into the transslunar trajectory.
Schaefer, Herman J. (Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory), "Apollo Mission Experience", NASA TM-X-2440,
Proceedings of the National Symposium on Natural and Manmade Radiation in Space, 1971.
On standard near-Earth orbital missions such os the prepamtory missions Apollo VII ond IX, tmpped protons are encountered in repeated passes through the South Atlantic Anomaly. On lunar missions, they are encountered in two complete traversals of the mdiotion belt on tmnslunar and trans-Earth injection. Since the angle of inclimtion of the plow of the geomagnetic equator to the plone of the coplamr orbits of the Moon ond the vehicle around the Earth varies continuously on o doily and monthly cycle, the geomagnetic tmjectory through the radiation belt varies from crossing to crossing. Sometimes the trajectory traverses the inner belt more periphemlly, rometimes more centrally.
Bellcom, Inc.
The Radiation Environment of Apollo, Interim Report, 1963. Section 3.2, Computer Programs.
A computer program has been compiled at Bellcomm tio compute the instantaneous and accumulated particle flux intercepted by a spacecraft in orbit or on a given lunar trajectory. A detailed mathematical description is given in Appendix B. The program uses the following initial six parameters to specify an orbit: atlitude, longitude, latitude, azimuth, elevation, and velocity magnitude at burnout and it computes the orbi8t as a functino of in-plane angle or true anomaly. A subroutine then converts geographical coordintates into B,L coordinates. A second subroutine interrogates the memory and reads out the particle (proton and/or electron) fluxesd out of ~1200 B,L boxes and the instantaneous and accumulated fluxes read out.
Roberts, W.T. (Marshall Space Flight Center). NASA TM-X-54700,
Space Radiations: A Compilation and Discussion, 1964.
Methods are now under development to determine the optimum trajectories (in terms of dose rates) to be used for various mission profiles. If this method proves successful, the mission may be made more complicated due to the specificatino of a path to be followed through the Van Allen zones.
By the way, Allan, regarding your "broken link" comment: I have PDFs of these and will be happy to provide them to you. The gov't, and thus the NASA Technical Reports Server, may be shut down, but not my hard drive.
