ENDEAVOUR - and the spaced-out NASA efforts

[lux]

Makes one wonder if even their low Earth orbit missions were really accomplished.

[simonshack]

NASA Ares I-X Rocket Launch Wed, 28 Oct 2009, fails miserably payload breaks going astray while rocket continues unchallenged (4 minutes and 36 seconds into the video below, they even cut the transmission for a few seconds)

For those who may wonder what the ARES program is (supposed to be):

NASA's proposed Ares rocket is supposed to replace the space shuttles and eventually fly astronauts to the moon. But the White House may scrap that plan. In the meantime, the space agency is considering additional flight tests, possibly in 2012 or 2013. The first manned flight of the Ares I rocket is targeted for 2015.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34262271/ns ... 3mSI9m6WyY

As you may read in the same MSNBC article, the first test flight (ARES 1-X) apparently didn't go so well:

NASA still puzzled about failed parachutes
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. — NASA still isn't sure why two parachutes failed during a test flight of its prototype moon rocket just over a month ago. The two-minute flight of the Ares I-X rocket went well Oct. 28. But only one of the three main parachutes on the first-stage booster opened properly. That caused the booster to slam harder than intended into the Atlantic Ocean. The booster was badly dented. (...)There were a few other snags with the $445 million flight of the experimental rocket: Some cable connectors did not separate and the final 80 seconds of data on the on-board recorder were lost.

But of course, 40 years earlier, NASA went flawlessly back and forth to the moon - six times within a three-year timespan... But in 2009, two out of three PARACHUTES + CABLE CONNECTORS malfunctioned - and DATA was lost - ALL in a 2-minute test flight!!!

Now, I was once attacked by a naysayer who basically argued that "it would be far too expensive to simulate 9/11, the NASA operations and whatnot with CGI" (computer graphic imagery). I have to say I somewhat agree with the guy: $445 million is far too much for the US taxpayers to fork out to finance this sort of crap:

source video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqRqpG5G5Iw

To be sure, for those black nuts and bolts (set against white rocket panels) of the ARIES to disappear/re-appear as we see in the above two frames can hardly be explained by "different lighting conditions". The only possible/rational explanation is that these images - supposedly captured by an on-board camera - are nothing but (flawed) digital renderings. Details such as nuts and bolts are notoriously prone to get 'washed out' in "3D" animation softwares (as used on 9/11, for instance). Having said that, I'm still happy to believe that something gets launched from Cape Canaveral on these occasions (for local people to watch from afar) - but what we are shown on TV is a wholly different matter.

In any case, let me quote the above article once again:

"The first manned flight of the Ares I rocket is targeted for 2015."

So, if all goes well, the USA will regain a way of sending their astronots to their ISS (International Space Station) - in three years time! Yet, back in the 60's, NASA would send astronots back and forth to the moon six times - in the same timespan! I remain in awe over how NASA succeeds so well in their REAL endeavour: to have most people believe in their utter bullshit stories.

[hollycrap]

Thanks for clarifying Simon. And thanks for further proving this is CGI.

So this was meant to happen as it happened, it was the "upper stage simulator" that went haywire without causing an explosion

Ares I-X launched on October 28, 2009 at 11:30 EDT (15:30 UTC) from Kennedy Space Center LC-39B, successfully completing a brief test flight. The vehicle's first stage ignited at T-0 seconds and Ares I-X lifted off from Launch Complex 39B.[17] The first stage separated from the upper stage simulator and parachuted into the Atlantic Ocean roughly 150 miles (240 km) downrange of the launch site. The maximum altitude of the rocket was not immediately known, but had been expected to be 28 miles (45 km).

The launch accomplished all primary test objectives,[18] and many lessons were learned in preparing and launching a new vehicle from Kennedy Space Center.[19]

Watch this .. wonder how they could recover the frames they did not show in the tv transmission
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... launch.ogg



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQvl0pY8GkM

[simonshack]

ROFL indeed, dear Hollycrap (love your nick, btw!)

Now, get this:

Ares \a-res\ as a boy's name is of Greek origin. Greek mythology: Ares was the god of war, and one of the lovers of Aphrodite, goddess of beauty. He was known as Mars in Roman mythology.
http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/1/Ares

[disinpho]

Now, get this:
Ares \a-res\ as a boy's name is of Greek origin. Greek mythology: Ares was the god of war, and one of the lovers of Aphrodite, goddess of beauty. He was known as Mars in Roman mythology.

Coincidently (or maybe not), "a-" is a common negative prefix as in "a-political" or "a-gnostic". "res" in latin means:

Latin Noun
rēs (genitive reī); f, fifth declension
thing, matter, issue, affair
Dixit duas res ei rubori fuisse.
He said that two things had abashed him.

So you could also read the name "a-res" as as "no-thing"

EDIT:
Somewhat related to the "a-" theme: In the same way A- can negate the following word. A is equivalent to 1 in Latin Gematria and is significant because it is the base unit of increment and is thus seing as creating and destroying/adding and subtracting. That is why Apollyon is called the Destroyer and why 11 is the number of chaos. This somewhat relates back to the A11 mission. He is also symbolized by the eagle, which also relates back to Apollo 11.

Anagrams of ARES: ARSE, arse, ears, ERAs, eras, rase, sear, sera

[Mitch Matrixx]

So, prototype ARES rocket is huge, weighs a lot, and puts out a claimed "22 million horsepower, and 3.6 million lbs of thrust" but, out in the Utah desert in 2009, Shep Smith and the gang at Faux news along with NA$A showed us that you don't need much to anchor said rocket down for some test fire action. Let's have a look-

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNBenbXJYF8
So, they managed to strap old ARES down with few U-bolts like you use on your car exhaust, and some "deep anchors" they fired that bad boy up and blast the desert rock for 2 straight minutes, and after manually putting out the thruster fire with robotic Co2 arm, we see nary a trace of hot or blackened rocks behind the rocket. That is some seriously clean and cool burning fuel they have, and we need some of that in our cars and trucks.


Next, we have an artist CGI rendition of how the Astronots are going to use ARES to go to the moon. Some really good effects going on, and quite remarkably, the Lunar Module hasn't changed much in the last 50 years! NA$A stuck on a couple more radar dishes solar panels outside, and stuffed a couple tablet computers inside, but outside not much has changed, other than the cool docking sequence shown @ 2:40. I know that if I was flying millions of miles through space, I wouldn't want to be able to see out the windshield in front of me, no, that's for sissies. NA$A goes blind style and loves it.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd-a__zQlJU

EDIT: Mods, I can't seem to get the YT tags to play nicely... Tried several times several ways, but cannot get it correct
Any guidance as to what I'm doing wrong would be great. Thanks

ADMIN NOTICE (yt links fixed... - simon)

[hollycrap]

EDIT: Mods, I can't seem to get the YT tags to play nicely... Tried several times several ways, but cannot get it correct
Any guidance as to what I'm doing wrong would be great. Thanks

You only want to embed the part in red

watch?v=QNBenbXJYF8&feature=related/

[hollycrap]

After having seen that all these missions are being faked, including the so called low-earth orbit ones we should be ready to formulate the ultimate question.

Is space travel impossible?

Lee De Forest (August 26, 1873 – June 30, 1961) was an American inventor with over 180 patents to his credit. De Forest invented the Audion, the vacuum tube that takes relatively weak electrical signals and amplifies them. De Forest is one of the fathers of the "electronic age", as the Audion helped to usher in the widespread use of electronics.

He is also credited with one of the principal inventions that brought sound to motion pictures.



An interview with Mr Da Forrest was published Feb 25, 1957 in the Lewinston Morning Tribune stating, that space travel was impossible

Some would convulsively laugh at Mr Da Forrest statements. After all going to space is as easy nowadays as surfing channels in your tv with the remote ... or .. is it?

Da Forest says space travel is impossible

Feb 25 1957. Lewiston Morning tribune.

One of America’s most famous scientists dismissed as impossible Sunday, one of modern science’s most persistent dreams – the dream of the travel into outer space.

Dr. De Lee Forest known as the "Father of Electronics" predicted that man wouldn’t ever even reach the moon let alone travel by rocket ship to strange worlds in distant galaxies

Man, declared De forest is inherently an earthly creature, and only his scientific imagination will make him ever a planetary emigrant

De forest invented the vacuum tube 51 years ago and that made possible the development of modern radio broadcasting, television and radar.

His observations of the future were broadcast Sunday by The Voice of America, the State Department Overseas information program

Sees Transoceanic TV.

De Forest forecast transoceanic television within ten years. He said this could be accomplished by skillful location of relay stations and by taking advantage of reflection of television waves from the ionosphere, the layer of electrical energy that surrounds the earth at a great height

But I am much more conservative in the estimate of interspace flight De Forest said

“But to place a man in a multistage rocket and project him into the controlling gravitational field of the moon, where the passenger can make scientific observations. Perhaps land alive, and then return to earth -- all that constitutes a wild dream worthy of Jules Verne” , he said adding

“I am old enough to say that such a man made moon voyage will never occur regardless of all scientific advances”

[nonhocapito]

One of America’s most famous scientists dismissed as impossible Sunday, one of modern science’s most persistent dreams – the dream of the travel into outer space.

Dr. De Lee Forest known as the "Father of Electronics" predicted that man wouldn’t ever even reach the moon let alone travel by rocket ship to strange worlds in distant galaxies

Man, declared De forest is inherently an earthly creature, and only his scientific imagination will make him ever a planetary emigrant

De forest invented the vacuum tube 51 years ago and that made possible the development of modern radio broadcasting, television and radar.

His observations of the future were broadcast Sunday by The Voice of America, the State Department Overseas information program

Sees Transoceanic TV.

De Forest forecast transoceanic television within ten years. He said this could be accomplished by skillful location of relay stations and by taking advantage of reflection of television waves from the ionosphere, the layer of electrical energy that surrounds the earth at a great height

But I am much more conservative in the estimate of interspace flight De Forest said

“But to place a man in a multistage rocket and project him into the controlling gravitational field of the moon, where the passenger can make scientific observations. Perhaps land alive, and then return to earth -- all that constitutes a wild dream worthy of Jules Verne” , he said adding

“I am old enough to say that such a man made moon voyage will never occur regardless of all scientific advances

Well not that i disagree, but I would love to read the actual arguments in support of these statements rather than just the statements themselves. Is there a source to this? Is it all here or there's more? Where this is taken from?

[hollycrap]

Well not that i disagree, but I would love to read the actual arguments in support of these statements rather than just the statements themselves. Is there a source to this? Is it all here or there's more? Where this is taken from?

From the Lewinston Morning Tribune, Feb 25, 1957

De Forest says space travel is impossible



As for the arguments I would also like to have chatted with him more in depth about the subject.

This is what i suspect.

Space is almost empty right?

Put a can of coke in a vacuum. The can will collapse onto itself completely.

Now imagine the can is "pressurized". It will only contract faster and explode on its own bootstrap.

Rememeber De Forest invented the vacuum tube in 1915. He should know a whole deal about vacuum

Correction: Dr. Lee deForest invented the vacuum tube in 1906. His tube, which he called the "audion," was first developed as a detector of radio waves and was quickly adopted by shipboard operators. Later experimentation, by deForest and others, showed the ability of the vacuum tube to generate radio signals with far greater precision than earlier systems. By 1914 the essentials of tube-based transmitters had been worked out.

[hollycrap]

Think we have stumbled across one of the best kept secrets about space

Vacuum Welds

Drawing Bead On Space Peril
Boston Globe (1960-1979) - Boston, Mass.
Author: DONALD WHITE
Date: Sep 12, 1965
Start Page: A_44
Pages: 1
Text Word Count: 264

One of the hazards of space travel is a phenomenon known as cold welding. The vacuum of space causes metal to stick together, a tendency that could be catastrophic in a space craft.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/boston/acce ... atl=google

And this one

Space travel lubrication is discussed

The bearings in an auto slide over one another because of the film of oil between them. The oil reduces friction by taking heat away from the metals

In space however, the bearings must operate in a vacuum which quickly evaporates oil and even the oxygen coating the metals

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Oct 19, 1962

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=yZ ... cuum&hl=en

And the usual liars jump up (only too late)!

In space

Mechanical problems in early satellites were sometimes attributed to cold welding. However, in 2006, Henry Spencer stated that the phenomenon of spontaneous cold welding in outer space is "basically a myth", pointing out that "there are no documented cases of it actually occurring in orbit, except in experiments deliberately designed to provoke it (with susceptible materials, great care to avoid contamination, and deliberate mechanical removal of oxide layers, etc.)."[3]

Three years following this 2006 post the European Space Agency published a peer reviewed paper detailing why cold welding is a significant issue that spacecraft designers need to carefully consider. The conclusions of this appropriately titled study can be found on page 25 of "Assessment of Cold Welding between Separable Contact Surfaces due to Impact and Fretting under Vacuum". The paper also cites a documented example from 1991 with the Galileo spacecraft high-gain antenna (see page 2; the technical source document from NASA regarding the Galileo spacecraft is also provided in a link here). [4] [5]

One source of difficulty is that cold welding does not exclude relative motion between the surfaces that are to be joined. This allows the broadly defined notions of galling, fretting, sticking, stiction and adhesion to overlap in some instances. For example, it is possible for a joint to be the result of both cold (or "vacuum") welding and galling (and/or fretting and/or impact). Galling and cold welding, therefore, are not mutually exclusive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_welding

[simonshack]

Think we have stumbled across one of the best kept secrets about space

One of the hazards of space travel is a phenomenon known as cold welding. The vacuum of space causes metal to stick together, a tendency that could be catastrophic in a space craft.

Holy crap!

That IS an interesting find, Hollycrap. I also found this 1972 NASA Technical report called Cold- Welding Test Environment. Let me just quote these few lines of the report:

II. Summary
A cold-welding program was initiated in 1969 to determine
the proper test environment for qualifying spacecraft
mechanisms. The specific objectives were:
(...bla -bla - bla...)
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi. ... 016873.pdf

Now, without the need to be a rocket scientist, one must ask oneself: if tests of such crucial technical importance were only INITITIATED as late as 1969 - how on Earth did they land Apollo11 on the moon that very same year?

[Heiwa]

Think we have stumbled across one of the best kept secrets about space

One of the hazards of space travel is a phenomenon known as cold welding. The vacuum of space causes metal to stick together, a tendency that could be catastrophic in a space craft.

Holy crap!

That IS an interesting find, Hollycrap. I also found this 1972 NASA Technical report called Cold- Welding Test Environment. Let me just quote these few lines of the report:

II. Summary
A cold-welding program was initiated in 1969 to determine
the proper test environment for qualifying spacecraft
mechanisms. The specific objectives were:
(...bla -bla - bla...)
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi. ... 016873.pdf

Now, without the need to be a rocket scientist, one must ask oneself: if tests of such crucial technical importance were only INITITIATED as late as 1969 - how on Earth did they land Apollo11 on the moon that very same year?

It is a good question. How do you lubricate anything supposed to work in the void, empty universe or on a moon?

[lux]

The Hasselblad cameras used by the Apollo mission have leaf shutters inside the lens like this:



They are called leaf shutters because they have a set of thin metal blades (leaves) that rapidly open and close during the exposure. These overlapping blades slide against each other as they move and are always in contact with one another. Leaf shutter blades generally do not have any lubrication on their surfaces, nothing that would come between them and the next blade.

Rather a difficult proposition in light of this cold welding situation.

And, of course, Hasselblads do have a number of moving parts that do require lubrication so that would be a problem as well, if the cameras were really in space, that is.

I find it hard to believe that at least some Hasselblad engineers at the time of Apollo didn't know damn well that their cameras didn't go to the moon. The same could be said of the Kodak film technicians of the era.

And then there is the matter of the Omega and Bulova wrist watches and clocks that the Apollo astro-nots supposedly had on board as well as many other mechanical devices with moving metal parts and/or lubrication.

[fbenario]

What authority do we have that 'cold welding' actually describes a real phenomenon of vacuums? Any experiments in chemistry or physics?