yup just left the moon with a little pop and thrust that was powerful enough to launch them but not damage the lander in anyway and meet up with the rocket and got a ride home with 1960s tech, never done that before but it all just worked out
[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 12, 2022 11:21:43 ago (+1/-0)
Just before the launch, the video camera pulled back, and at the same time as the launch, it tilted up to keep the the module in the image. If the camera was operated remotely, how did they time it so precisely to track the module when there's a three second delay in electronic signals from Earth to the moon? Sounds like bullshit to me.
Moon has less gravity and no atmosphere. Takes a lot less energy to get into orbit. Should be easy enough to verify, just get a powerful telescope and find the lander bottom that was left there.
Edit: apparently not that easy
no telescope on Earth can see the leftover descent stages of the Apollo Lunar Modules or anything else Apollo-related. Not even the Hubble Space Telescope can discern evidence of the Apollo landings. The laws of optics define its limits.
Hubble's 94.5-inch mirror has a resolution of 0.024″ in ultraviolet light, which translates to 141 feet (43 meters) at the Moon's distance. In visible light, it's 0.05″, or closer to 300 feet. Given that the largest piece of equipment left on the Moon after each mission was the 17.9-foot-high by 14-foot-wide Lunar Module, you can see the problem.
[ + ] lord_nougat
[ - ] lord_nougat 3 points 2.0 yearsMay 12, 2022 10:48:12 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] HughBriss
[ - ] HughBriss 1 point 2.0 yearsMay 12, 2022 11:21:43 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Hobama
[ - ] Hobama 0 points 2.0 yearsMay 12, 2022 20:15:54 ago (+0/-0)*
Edit: apparently not that easy
Well fuck…