The truth about the moon rocket Saturn-5 (criticism of the speculations of Dr. Sc. Popov)


A can without a crew that fell into the ocean after take-off (according to A.I. Popov)

"Against the stupidity of the gods themselves are powerless to fight!"
Friedrich Schiller

The tireless fighter with the history of the Apollo program, Doctor of Physics and Mathematics AI Popov in 2012 wrote an article " A Brief History of the American Moon Rocket " in which he tried to prove that the Saturn-5 rocket did not send to the Moon any of the Apollos 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17. According to in his opinion, the 1968 Lunar Odyssey was not at all! Some speculations from Popov’s article look pretty convincing, and his doctoral degree in physics inspires supporters of lunar conspiracy (hereafter lunoborts ’), who in Russia already make up the overwhelming majority, and their number is increasing epidemically in the world. At the same time, the Moonbreakers, as a rule, have no doubt about the Apollo program ... because they "know for sure" that the USA removed it in Hollywood and imposed it on humanity with the complicity of the USSR.

The article "A Brief History of the American Moon Rocket" consists of 5 independent sections and the conclusion that Saturn-5 not only never sent people to the Moon, but even was not able to bring a single gram of cargo to near-earth orbit. All statements by A.I. Popova divided into the main theses, which are carefully reviewed one by one. It will not be boring.

Thesis 1 . 12/21/1968 Apollo 8 set off on the first manned flight to the Moon after the second test of the Saturn 5 rocket, which turned out to be a failure (04/04/1968 with the Apollo 6 unmanned ship). On this adventure, in fact, NASA would never have gone. Consequently, Apollo 8 did not fly anywhere except the Atlantic (without crew), with all the consequences for the lunar program as a whole.

Denial of. To begin with, the failure of this test is Popov’s value judgment. The flight was unsuccessful, but, nevertheless, Apollo 6 carried out a rather intensive test program. Despite the problems with the engines of the 2nd stage (two of the five prematurely disconnected), the ship went into low near-earth orbit and made 2 turns. Then, trying to get on the trajectory to the Moon and unable to turn on the engine of the 3rd stage for the second time, Apollo 6 got rid of it and used its own motor. However, the fuel was not enough, and the ship was only able to reach a highly elliptical orbit with an apogee of 22.2 thousand km. Then he entered the atmosphere at a speed of about 10 km / s and landed safely, deviating from the calculated point by only 90 km. And where is the test failure ?

On the contrary, Saturn-5 proved to be a very reliable rocket! Even "having lost" two second-stage engines of five, he managed to bring Apollo 6 with the third stage into near-earth orbit. Moreover, the rocket withstood the vibrations and longitudinal vibrations of the hull at the start (oscillations), which exceeded the standard values. The ensuing problem with the second turning on of the 3rd stage engine could be related to computer or automation failure. It is possible that the crew would be able to eliminate it.

Thus, this flight not only revealed problems with the engine management system, but also demonstrated the reliability of the Saturn-5-Apollo system. Obviously, the NASA leadership felt confident that a catastrophe would not occur, even if something went wrong. If the causes of failures were easily resolved, then there was no need to lose expensive Saturn-5 for another check.

It is necessary to preempt the Lunoborians' attempts to challenge the last statement by saying that NASA has three Saturn-5 left, therefore there was a reserve for tests. There was no such reserve, since all 3 of the remaining rockets were planned for lunar expeditions. In total it was supposed to make 10 landings on the Moon. But the flight of Apollo 13 was an emergency, and after the 6th landing of the Apollo 17, the decision was made to stop the program. Associated with both the desire to save costs in the absence of the need to continue research (the Moon was simpler than they thought - completely dead world without tectonic activity and signs of minerals), and the reluctance to continue to tempt fate for a catastrophe, the possibility of which Apollo 13 recalled.

It is important to note that NASA paid great attention to bench testing of engines and rocket systems. Therefore, it is possible that troubleshooting has been verified on Earth. The ability of Saturn-5 to fly confidently was proved by the tests of Apollo 4 (11.11.1967) and Apollo 6. Nor should we forget that the Saturn-5 was preceded by a whole line of rockets of the Saturn family, on which individual systems and technologies were worked out. Moon rocket did not appear on an empty place!

The statement that Apollo-8 could not go to the Moon without checking the command module to enter the atmosphere at the 2nd cosmic speed (11 km / s - the speed of returning from the Moon) is refuted by the fact that during the automatic flight of Apollo-6 he safely entered the atmosphere at 10 km / s. It means there was a certainty that even 1 km / sec would not add significant problems (heating will increase by 20%, for example). In addition, NASA was in a hurry with the first flight around the moon and was taking reasonable risks.

In addition, A.I. Popov is silent about the fact that between Apollo 6 and 8 was a manned flight of Apollo 7 (10/10/1968 - 10/22/1968). It took place in near-earth orbit, with all the systems of the ship being tested. But Apollo 7 launched the Saturn-1B rocket into space, not Saturn-5. This means that it was enough to test those systems that failed in the flight of Apollo 6 (if there were not enough bench tests).

This assumption is quite natural, since the most serious problems arose with the J-2 engines of the second stage, and this LRE is also installed at the 2nd stage of Saturn-1B. In addition, the failure of the engines of Saturn-5 could be associated with the control system, which was located in Apollo. Then it was not the carrier rocket that was to be checked, but the ship. What, obviously, was done in the long flight of Apollo 7.

Problems with access to the trajectory to the Moon, which arose on 04/04/1968, despite Popov’s pathos, were not critical in order to refuse to launch Apollo-8 without checking in a test flight. If they repeated and Borman’s crew could not fix them while the ship was winding the coils around the Earth, then they would simply stop flying and return to Earth.

It should also be borne in mind that NASA was frantically in a hurry. They had well-founded fears that the Russians would reach the moon earlier. The first attempt to launch the Soviet lunar rocket H-1 occurred on 02/21/1969, that is, exactly 2 months after the launch of Apollo 8! Up to this point, the United States could only guess how close the USSR was to the goal. That is why NASA did not have time for another automatic flight of Saturn-5, in the absence of this critical need, and 2 months after returning to Earth of Apollo 7 astronauts Borman, Lowell and Anders went on a date with the Moon.

Thus, the bubble inflated by speculation burst in a conscientious analysis of the issue. This applies to all the fantasies of the Moonriars, who are in a hurry to pass off as revelation everything that they personally do not understand, and there is no desire to understand or insufficient education.

Another proof that moon flights took off Kubrick in Hollywood))

Then ai Popov proceeds to other fabrications:
“Against the background of grand success in the Marshall Center (Houston, Alabama), where Saturn-5 was created, two strange and therefore not very advertised events took place.

In connection with the outstanding successes in the development of the Saturn-5 rocket, temporarily dismiss 700 employees of the Center, and release Chief Designer and Director of the Center Werner von Braun from these positions on a permanent basis.

To begin with, in that same year of 1968, in which the last unmanned tests of the Saturn-5 failed, seven hundred Center employees received notifications of “temporary dismissal”. 2 more years have passed. By January 1970, NASA had already announced five successful launches of the Apollo manned spacecraft (from A-8 to A-12), and at the heart of all these successes was the Saturn-5 rocket.

And at this very time, the permanent director of the Center, the chief designer of many rockets and space systems, the chief designer of the Saturn-5 rocket, Werner von Braun (ill. 6), is dismissed from his post and removed from the leadership of rocket developments. And not "temporary", but forever. "

Thesis 2. NASA fired more than 700 German engineers from the von-Brown team with him, precisely because they failed to make a lunar rocket. Moreover, the decision to dismiss was made in 1968. And then the United States began to lie disgracefully about flights to the moon (and even dragged into this scam, although it is not clear how, the USSR).

Denial of . The fact of such a hasty dismissal of the Von-Brown team is quite obvious: the United States wanted to launder its lunar triumph of ties with former Nazis. The Germans were told: “Thank you for the excellent work, guys, but then we will do without you, goodbye!”

At the same time, Popov, as usual, kept silent about important facts. Von-Brown, though, was removed from the development of rockets in 1970, but he was not fired, but transferred to the honorary position of deputy. NASA director of flight planning, where he remained until 1972. Then he found a dust-free job in space, but already private business. Moreover, in 1969, the creator of Saturn-5 was awarded the medal "For Distinguished Service" - the highest NASA award. This fact strongly contradicts speculation that von Braun was fired for the failure of a lunar rocket.

A.I. Popov tried to refute this argument as follows.
“There is an explanation of this completion of the career of the“ rocket baron ”by the Nazi past. However, it is clearly attracted - the opinion of the Americans about the Nazi danger from German scientists is clearly expressed in the instructions of the Head of Operation Clip, "If they are of definite scientific interest for us, then their political past plays no role."

In addition, 25 years have passed from 1945 to 1970. Give citizenship, entrust the management of the main rocket design bureau of the country, entrust the development of the first American satellite and the preparation of the first cosmonaut, and then suddenly recall the Nazi past! “Does this sound crazy?”

No, not at all crazy! If something is drawn here (by the ears), then this is Operation Clip, which took place after the end of the war, that is, a quarter of a century before the flight to the Moon. The USA never forgot about the Nazi past of von Braun and his staff, but for the time being they put up with it, because needed experienced German engineers. After they were no longer needed (Saturn-5-Apollo successfully flew to the moon), they hurried to get rid of the Germans. More than logical! But that's not all.

Already in 1969, NASA embarked on the Space Shuttle program, which was supposed to make astronautics cheaper, and also provide a solution to military tasks. For example, “shuttles” were used to output large satellites of the Lacrosse series radar reconnaissance, which could not be deployed on the Titans-4 or Saturns-1B. Shuttles could also be used as orbital bombers and fighters, in this alliance with them could not (in the late 80s the USSR created a reusable Buran ship with similar characteristics and the carrier Energy for it, only slightly inferior to Saturn-5).

Dismissing the Germans, NASA consciously agreed that it would be impossible to continue the operation of Saturn-5. Without people who know all the nuances, the drawings are dead! In the light of the Space Shuttle program, Saturn-5, designed for the lunar race, was not needed. In addition, the operation of such a powerful and large rocket for launching ships into Earth orbit was not only expensive, but also risky. What are the only vibrations at the start, which astronauts "enjoyed"! The moon race justified such a risk, but routine flights into orbit did not. Obviously, this was also the reason for the rejection of Saturn-5.

If we argue in a similar paranoid way, then we can conclude that there were no shuttle flights. After all, the United States voluntarily abandoned the magnificent, far ahead of their time spacecraft after two catastrophes on 135 successful flights + 5 test, albeit with a large number of casualties due to the large crew (space liner). Both occurred because of problems with thermal insulation coating, which were probably solved at the level of operational rules.

But in 2011, the Washington bureaucracy stabbed the program, leaving the United States without manned astronautics. Future debaters of shuttle flights will surely say: “Does this sound crazy?” And this time is not far off, because Lunobortsi, headed by Dr.Sc. Popov had already written to the point that Gemini and Mercury did not fly into orbit at all!

It is worth noting that the United States' refusal to continue producing Saturn-5 did not at all deprive them of the ability to send astronauts into space, although NASA activity in the field of manned flights after the lunar program and before the appearance of shuttles (1981) dropped sharply. After 3 deliveries of crews to Skylab station in 1973, carried out by Saturn-1B missiles, the USA took part in the Soyuz-Apollon joint flight with the USSR (1975), where Saturn-1B was also used. Against this background, the rejection of the shuttles looks rather strange, to say the least. There is something to think about lovers to rewrite history in favor of political affiliation!

Shuttle Discovery (also fell into the ocean immediately after launch?)

Thesis 3. NASA refused to manufacture Saturn-5 missiles, which means they never were in the working version.

The refutation given above.

Thesis 4. Quote from Popov:
“Since 1976, the USSR has been practicing the participation of foreign astronauts in flights on the Soyuz spacecraft. Only until 1986, 11 foreign astronauts flew on the "Unions". ”
The US on the Apollos did not roll any foreigners, so they had nothing to ride on.

This nonsense does not even want to refute! Well, NASA has always had such a position: “FIG, you, gentlemen are foreigners, and not space flights at the expense of American taxpayers!” The USSR had its own policy of space openness, and he began to carry it out in 1976. What does this have to do with lunar flights ? The United States did not intend to prove the reality of Saturn-5 to anyone, rolling on it foreign passengers. According to Popov, this means that they had something to hide - a vivid example of the perverted logic of the Lunoborts.

Before proceeding further, it is worth mentioning the “expert” whom Popov presented in his article. Someone N.V. Lebedev, a geographer by education and a geologist by profession. By the nature of the service, he came into contact with the testing of missiles. So what? The conjecture of this respected person is opposed by the unanimous opinion of all the space specialists of the USSR and the Russian Federation, including the cosmonauts! Which never supported nonsense about the US conspiracy of the moon, and many actively refuted them (for example, Alexey Leonov and Georgy Grechko).

Thesis 5. Measuring the speed of a rocket at 110–112 seconds of flight gives a value that is too small to reach Earth orbit. Consequently, the Apollos did not fly into space at all.

Using video taking off Saturnov-5, Popov tried to prove that the rocket with Apollo 11 was passing cirrus at an altitude of 8 km in the 105th second of the flight. From here he concluded that the speed of Saturn-5 was deliberately insufficient for going into orbit. In the mocking tone, which is characteristic of moonwrestlers, he calls Saturn-5 a flying tin can, which fell shortly after launch into the Atlantic Ocean.

Denial of. I was not lazy and watched all the documentary videos of the starting Saturn-5 with Apollo.

Apollo-4, 9.11.67

The camera monitors the rocket taking off for 45 seconds. Whether or not there are clouds in its path is difficult to discern.

Apollo-6, 04/04/68. Clouds can not be seen because of poor video quality.

Apollo-8, 12/21/68. Clouds can not be seen because of poor video quality.

Apollo-9, 3.03.69. Clouds can not be seen because of poor video quality.

Apollo-10, 05.05.69

The rocket leaves the launch pad at 5:33 and is clearly visible among the clouds from 6:27 to 6:31.
A total of 55 seconds before the passage of the clouds, it is not clear whether Saturn-5 is in the thickness of the clouds or above it. Shooting is conducted by a camera located below, so it is possible that the rocket is visible through the clouds of smoke and steam remaining in its path. Haze moves quickly, so it is close to the camera. Consequently, either the camera is among the clouds and then Saturn-5 flies above them, or the camera hit the trail of a rocket, which seems to us clouds.

In any case, we can conclude that in the time interval 6:27 to 6:31 we see a rocket above the clouds. Earlier at 6:11 it can be seen that Saturn 5 passes through the clouds. Immediately after this, at 6:17 - 6:19 a phrase is heard that a rocket passes through the clouds. Thus, based on this video, Saturn-5 passed the clouds 45 - 55 seconds after the start.

Apollo-11, 07.16.69

Artistically assembled video about the historic launch of Apollo 11, where leaving the launching table for almost 2 minutes is played from all angles and in slow replays. The rocket begins to move at 2:37 and until about 4:20 “treading water” (of course virtually). Around 4:20 the takeoff begins. At the interval of 5:20 - 5:30 it is seen how the Saturn-5 passes through the clouds, i.e., the rise time to the clouds is again close to 60 seconds. Again, the question: is it a cloud or a trace of the rocket itself, through which it is observed?

Here is the original video start Apollo-11

The rise begins at 6:12. At the interval of 6:43 - 6:50, the rocket passes through the clouds, i.e., 30 - 40 seconds after launch.On the interval of 7:05 - 7:15, the clouds are again visible, which corresponds to what was said above about the rise time to clouds no more than 60 seconds. Again: were these clouds or a smoky-steam trail from a rocket? If, however, there are clouds, it looks like Saturn 5 is above them. Clouds move quickly, so they are close to the camera. Accordingly, the rocket is much higher than the clouds.

Apollo-12, 11.11.69

Clouds can not be seen because of poor video quality. Mostly shown animation made about this start. It is known that 2 lightnings hit Apollo 12 at the start. It is possible that the lack of a good video was due to the weather.

Apollo 13.04.04

Clouds are not visible. The ascent begins at 1:44, at around 2:58, i.e., after 74 seconds, an elevation mark of 32,860 feet appears, which is close to 10 km. This contradicts Popov’s statement that Saturn-5 was at an altitude of 8 km, 105 seconds after the start.

Apollo-14, 01.31.71. Clouds are not visible at all.

Apollo-15, 07.27.71

The rise begins at 0:40. At the interval of 1:30 - 1:40, a faint haze is visible around the rocket. If these are clouds, then the rise to the clouds took 50 - 60 seconds. From 1:40 to 1:50 it looks like Saturn 5 is already above the clouds.

Apollo-16, 16.04.72

It can be clearly seen as Apollo 16 taking off at 45 seconds (!) After the start passes through the clouds.

Apollo-17 took off at night, so no clouds were visible.

The last flight of man to the moon.

Thus, the statements of A.I. Popov that the Saturn-5 rocket with the Apollo-11 spacecraft passed the clouds at an altitude of 8 km on the 105th second of the flight is not confirmed, but strongly refuted by documentary shots. In addition, cirrus clouds are not required to be at an altitude of 8 km, but can be located at 9 or even 10 km.

Thesis 6 . Measuring the speed of the rocket at the time of separation of the first stage gives a value that is almost 2.5 times less than what NASA claims.

Popov tried to prove that after the separation of the 1st stage the speed of Saturn-5 was not 2.4 km / s, but only 0.9 - 1 km / s. At first glance it may seem that here a tireless whistleblower finally caught NASA by the tail.

He meticulously studies a little more than half a second of the flight of Saturn-5 between 160 and 165 seconds after the start, soon after the separation of the 1st stage. It is worth reading carefully before moving on. Unlike all other lunobor fantasies, these estimates of speed look believable. However, the author of this exposing idea was Ph.D. S.G.Pokrovsky.

The explosion somewhere behind, which Popov considered, is nothing more than triggered solid propellant boosters (RDTTs) separating the 1st stage from the rest of the rocket, there were a total of 8 pieces. Another 8 solid propellant rotors at the 2nd stage gave it a push for fuel shrinkage in the tanks before turning on the J-2 cruise engines . This is where these puffs of smoke come from!

Popov's rantings provide a vivid example of how moonbeaters declare suspicious facts that they personally do not understand. For example, he writes:
“Actually, as NASA shows a frame-by-frame analysis of newsreels, this strange“ explosion ”does not occur at the moment of separation of the first stage (as B. Chertok writes), but approximately 3s before that. In this chapter, we will not go into the causes of this "explosion."

Denial of . And it would be worthwhile to “go into the causes” before correcting the outstanding rocket scientist, Academician Chertok. Naturally, the solid-propellant rocket motors worked slightly earlier than the actual separation of the 1st stage, and their thrust was small so as not to disturb the movement of the remaining rocket. The massive 1st stage (about 130 tons without fuel) began to slowly lag behind. In addition to the solid propellant rocket motor, explosive squibs exploded to cut off the mounts.

But why go into details, risking being disappointed in his “exposure” ?! With all the pedantry, which shows Popov, in general, his approach is unscientific. He does not try to understand the facts, but drives them under the Dogma of Faith: "Americans did not fly to the moon!"

Popov’s statement that immediately after the separation of the 1st stage the rocket was at an altitude of 20–30 km, is based on his own estimates (thesis 5). But, as shown above, these estimates are “sucked from the finger”. Therefore, we will proceed from the data of NASA that the first stage separated at an altitude of 66 km. How easy it is to check with the help of a calculator , the air pressure there is about 8.5 Pa. Normal atmospheric pressure is 101 325 Pa, i.e., almost 12 thousand times more. But even in such a rarefied medium, the shock wave at the edge of the Mach cone is a tangible factor. The fact is that at an altitude of 66 km the volume density of the kinetic energy of the air flow at a speed of 2.4 km / s is equal to the density of wind energy at the Earth's surface, having a speed of 24.7 km / s, i.e., about 90 km / h.

If the 1st stage of Saturn-5 were dropped at an altitude of 30 km and a speed of 0.95 km / s, as Popov fantasizes, the energy of the oncoming flow would be 24 times higher, which corresponds to a hurricane of about 390 km / h (there are no such it happens). Interestingly, at a level of 30 km, the rocket speed was really close to 0.95 km / s, but it happened near the 102nd second of flight and the 1st stage work did not end there.

For reference: with a vertical rise in the field of earth gravity rocket speed
$ v (t) = (u-gT) \ ln (\ frac {T} {Tt}) $ and height $ h (t) = (u-gT) \ left (t- (Tt) \ ln (\ frac {T} {Tt}) \ right) $ where $ u $ - engine specific impulse in m / s, $ M $ - the launch mass of the rocket, $ T = \ frac {M} {\ mu} $ where $ \ mu $- fuel consumption in kg / sec. Only the 1st stage is supposed to work. For Saturn 5 you can take$ M = $ 2,750 tons, $ u = 2.7 $ km / s $ \ mu = 13 $ t / s (at the maximum power of the fuel system pumps 13.5 t / s). Wherein $ \ mu = \ frac {F} {u} $ where $ F = 3500 $ ts - Saturn-5 thrust force at ground level.

With $ t = 102 $ sec get $ h = 30.5 $ km and $ v = 0.8 $km / s, but the actual speed was slightly higher, and the height was slightly lower, because Saturn-5 did not move vertically (but had not yet had time to bend strongly). This refutes the allegations of A.I. Popov that at 105 seconds of the Apollo-11 flight, a cloud layer passed at an altitude of 8 km (thesis 5).

It should be noted that before the separation of the 1st stage, at the 150th second after leaving the starting table ($ t = $ 150sec) these formulas give a speed of 1.9 km / s and a height of 91.7 km. In reality, the speed was significantly higher, and the height was significantly lower. This is due to the fact that at an altitude of 66 km the rocket had a pitch angle much smaller than the direct one (apparently close to 45 degrees). The exact calculation will require solving the diff system. dynamic equations in the coordinate system with the origin in the center of the Earth:
$\ddot x=\frac{F}{M-\mu t}\frac{\dot x}{\sqrt{\dot x^2+\dot y^2}}-g\frac{R^2x}{(x^2+y^2)^{3/2}}\qquad \ddot y=\frac{F}{M-\mu t}\frac{\dot y}{\sqrt{\dot x^2+\dot y^2}}-g\frac{R^2y}{(x^2+y^2)^{3/2}}$

with initial conditions that take into account the effect of the slingshot, where R is the radius of the Earth. It should also be noted that 30 seconds before the 1st stage was reset, one of the F-1 (central) engines was turned off so that the acceleration did not reach excessive values ​​of . With this power$F$decreased 1.25 times (however, the thrust of each engine increased slightly due to a drop in atmospheric pressure). This perfectly characterizes the power reserve of Saturn-5, against which the claims that he was not able to go into near-earth orbit (and that’s what was required of him) look deceptively evil.

The discharge of the 1st stage of Saturn-5, height 66 km, speed 2.4 km / sec.

A.I.Popov offers 3 methods for estimating speed, giving similar results.

The first method uses the angle at the vertex of the Mach cone, which is visible in frames with Saturn-5. This cone is the front of the acoustic wave that propagates from a supersonic device.

Here is how A.I. Popov explains the appearance of a cone-shaped, bright cloud around Saturn-5, which can be seen in the photo.
“What is important for us is that smoke particles scatter the sun’s rays and make the cone visible. In this case, smoke cannot penetrate the density jump barrier outside and leave the Mach cone. Thus, the illuminated smoke perfectly outlines the cone. "

The explanation of the reasons for the origin of the sacred "shroud" around Saturn-5 is apparently correct.

A jet of gases and smoke escaping from 8 solid propellant rocket motors at the separation of the 1st stage was directed forward in the direction of flight. She enveloped Saturn-5 with a smoke-gas cloud in which the rocket moved for a short time, forming the Mach cone. As this cloud gradually slowed down in the air, the cone and the rocket emerged from it. At the same time, the pressure surge on the Mach cone served as a barrier, which for some time, no more than 0.5 seconds, kept the smoke-gas mixture inside it. A score of 0.5 seconds follows from the comparison of frames at the level of 8.76s (ill. 10), where the rocket is still in the cloud, and 9.29s (ill. 5), where it has already dropped its light “shroud”.

All 3 methods that Popov used in his article are based on the idea that clouds from “explosions” are almost instantaneously inhibited by the oncoming air flow (now we know that this is smoke from the 1st and 2nd stages separating solid propellant rocket motors) as well as from squibs).

But the density of air at an altitude of 66 km is extremely small, and the density of the gas bunch around the rocket, which is fueled by gas from solid propellant rocket motors and sustainer LRE, must be significantly higher. The expansion of the smoky-gas cloud is partly constrained by the boundary of the Mach cone, which does not terminate at the base of the first stage. As seen in the frames, this cloud breaks through the shock wave, but only partially. Therefore, in the immediate vicinity of the rocket and behind it, an area is formed that is filled with a denser gas than the surrounding air.

It is important to note that at the height of the 1st stage compartment (66 km), the air density is 0.00013 kg / cubic meter, i.e., it is almost 9,400 times less than at sea level! Precisely because the pressure and density of air are insignificant, he could not stop the movement of relatively dense "clouds" around the rocket in less than 0.1 seconds, making them motionless relative to the atmosphere.

It is rather strange that the specialist in gas dynamics, Dr. Sc. Bogovalov A.V. from MEPI, which A.I. Popov thanks for reviewing the article, did not think about such simple things. Does he also really want to expose the Americans?


The idea of ​​2 other methods for measuring speed is described in the following quotation.
« . . ( ) , , . (9,04) , (9,08), . , , , . , , «9,08» . .»

Popov cannot imagine that "a smoke cloud can rush after a rocket, overcoming air resistance, but at the same time maintaining its shape." Indeed, it is rather difficult to imagine something similar at low altitude, although it is worth noting that shape retention is very relative, and the cloud “rushes behind the rocket” for less than half a second. But in this case, the altitude is 66 km, and the air density is 9,400 times less than at sea level! If the density of the gas in the smoke cloud is significantly higher, which seems to be very realistic, then it is quite capable of passing through extremely discharged air. At least for the short time intervals considered by Popov. Although, of course, slow braking takes place .

In any case, the article does not contain any evidence of the hypothesis that clouds of smoke in the photo can be considered stationary relative to the surrounding air. Therefore, estimates of the speed of Saturn-5 relative to these clouds are groundlessly declared as estimates of the velocity relative to the Earth.

Popov received for her 3 fairly close to each other values ​​around 0.95 km / s - the spread does not exceed 15%. Estimating their deviation from the average, he pulled a spectacular error of 5%. This fact, as it seems to him, is a murderous argument in favor of the version that Saturn-5 was not able to go into Earth orbit.

“What kind of a moon is here!”, Exclaims A.I. Popov.He knows very well that the ability to go to the Moon depended only on the 3rd stage, which was again included in near-earth orbit, but it still distorts, because sarcasm for lunoborts is the main weapon. For all her scientific coquetry, Popov’s article is thoroughly imbued with journalistic sarcasm. If he is convinced that he is right and is ready to defend her in an honest discussion, then what was the need to hurl poisonous arrows of wit and manipulate the minds of his fans, far from science? This is the reason for the very harsh tone of my article.

Popov would indeed have delivered a crushing blow if these estimates of speed were independent between themselves. However, all three values ​​were obtained within the framework of one model of a real phenomenon, which Popov unreasonably considers adequate. Namely, he assumes that Saturn-5 flew in clouds of smoke at an altitude of 20–30 km (air density at 30 km is about 140 times more than 66 km). In this case, the clouds almost instantly stopped by the oncoming flow, and no other gas-dynamic phenomena, with the exception of the action of jets from the LRE, did not affect the behavior of the smoke trail.

All three estimates are interrelated, because they give the speed of the rocket relative to the "fixed" clouds of smoke. Their proximity suggests that Popov quite carefully considered everything. However, this was done as part of the inventedim a physical model. It is worth emphasizing once again that this was a realistic estimate of the speed of Saturn-5 relative to smoke clouds formed after the discharge of the 1st stage.

In order for the Popov model to be correct, it is necessary to assume that the incoming flow completely stopped the smoke cloud in less than 0.1 seconds. At the same time, the speed of the cloud should have changed by 2.4 km / s, which corresponds to acceleration above 2,400 g. Since it consists of smoke particles suspended in a much denser gas from the products of combustion in solid propellant rocket engines and liquid propellant rocket engines, it is highly doubtful that everything happened this way.

Received A.I. Popov estimates mean that in the considered time intervals (less than 0.5 sec), clouds of smoke moved in the direction of the rocket’s flight at an average speed of about 2.4 - 0.95 = 1.45 km / sec, stopping not as fast as he imagined.

Dust from the wheels of the lunar rover does not curl up, but flies along the parabolas like stones. This was only possible in a vacuum! That is, on the moon.

And so does the dust flying out from under the wheels of a car on Earth.

In conclusion of this topic we quote A.I. Popova:
“Comparison of the shape of the smoke cloud around the rocket in Figure 5 (9.04 s) and in Figure 7 shows that a good image is clearly removed from the same film from which the clip studied is cut. Why NASA has impaired image quality by introducing the clip, [2] we will not discuss here. ”

In the Lunoborty, everything that is incomprehensible to them goes to work! The physicist Popov does not understand that it is easier to get a photo of a moving object than a film with the same resolution. The plane, which followed the flight of Saturn-5, at the same time made photographs and filmed a movie. Naturally, the process of separation of the 1st stage was photographed. At the same time continuously worked movie camera. And so it happened that there are two frames of the same flight moment, having different resolution. And if it did not occur to Popov, then NASA has deceived humanity! “We will not discuss here,” but the dirty hint has already been thrown. And you just had to think a little.

Thesis 7 . On the morning of July 16, 1969, when Apollo 11 sailed to the Moon, several Soviet ships, being close to Cape Canaveral in the Atlantic, watched Saturn-5 take-off. However, American warships and Orion patrol aircraft attempted to interfere. Consequently, they tried to hide the fact that Saturn 5 did not go into orbit and fell into the ocean .

Denial of. A great example of moon paranoia! Naturally, the Americans were concerned about the presence of the ships of the USSR. Popov himself writes that there was a directive by President Nixon on the beginning of a nuclear war in the event of an attempt by the USSR to shoot down Saturn 5. This is what the USA really feared! That our country, trying to thwart their deafening triumph and still win the moon race, will go even to shoot down a rocket with astronauts. At that level of mutual distrust and military confrontation, which then took place (including in Vietnam), such concerns were quite natural.

Therefore, they took all precautions, including using equipment to create radio interference. Warriors just did their usual work. In addition, the United States really tried to hide the secret part of the lunar rocket telemetry. All space development (with them and with us) had a military component. Saturn-5, for example, could deliver a nuclear charge of enormous power to hundreds of Megatons to the territory of the USSR. Therefore, the Americans had something to hide.

But this does not mean that the Soviet Union could not observe the rise of Saturn-5 in the mode of radar. Completely suppress a powerful radar is quite difficult, if not destroy it. Statements from the USSR that he was deprived of the opportunity to observe the rise of Apollo 11, have never been reported.

So what is AI Popov blew another pseudo-exposing bubble . Moreover, the episode with the operation Crossroad vividly illuminates the absurdity of the conjectures that the USSR went to collusion with the United States. The drama of this situation showed what the price of victory in the moon race was. Neither of which playing up to the ideological opponent at that time could even be a question! It is strange that Popov, who found the USSR well, believes in nonsense about the lunar conspiracy.

In addition, he distorts when he exposes our country as a model of cosmic openness against the background of American secrecy. The fact that the USSR reported to one English observatory that it launched a rocket in order to hit the moon is cited as evidence. Well, and the United States notified the whole world about their lunar flights! At the same time, the USSR never invited American specialists to its territory, so that they could deploy tracking equipment and receive telemetric data of the rockets that took off from the Baikonur or Plisetsk cosmodrome.

Service module of Apollo-13, the capsule from which was caught by the sailors of the USSR (according to AI Popov).

Thesis 8.
“On September 8, 1970, in the Soviet harbor of Murmansk, the Apollo command module“ caught by a Soviet fishing trawler in the Bay of Biscay ”was handed over to the surprised crew of the US icebreaker Southwind!

This proves that immediately after the take-off of Saturn-5, they fell into the ocean .

Denial of. In addition to speculation, this “disclosure” is based solely on the book “Urhajozasi Lexikon”, published by Zrinyi (p.33), which was published in Hungary in 1981. Popov brings such a reason for this strange fact (if indeed something is written in the book about this, I did not find it on the Web).
“In 1985, the leadership of the CPSU began the destruction of the Soviet system and the consistent surrender of the positions of the USSR in Eastern Europe. Just as the wind grows stronger before the storm, so in politics nothing happens suddenly. The winds of future change blew out in Hungary. And then in 1981, Hungarian witnesses published their pictures. ”

The winds of change that blew out in Hungary were anti-Soviet. What is the benefit of Hungarians to publish information that is extremely harmful to the USA, if it really was true? But even if the transfer to the United States of a model of the Apollo spacecraft descent module, which fell into the hands of Soviet sailors, took place, this does not contain anything mysterious. Many missiles launched from Cape Canaveral, beginning with Redstone, have fallen into the Atlantic Ocean. Among them could be rockets with Apollo capsule mock-ups. These models were also used in crew rescue exercises after landing, during which one of them could be lost (for example, because of a storm).

Further AI Popov is trying to prove that the command module allegedly transferred to the United States belonged to Apollo 13 and was a model that did not go beyond the atmosphere. All reasoning is based on speculation, for more convincing is a picture of Apollo 13, allegedly exposed as fake.
“At that time, this work was done perfectly. And the “service module” accidentally turned to the camera by the right side, although with free movement in space this is a great success. And the deep blackness around the module is no worse than the space one. ”

Ernichaya about deep blackness, physicist-spectroscopist Popov not for the first time demonstrates a lack of understanding of the elementary effect. Near the ship, brightly lit by the sun, relatively dim stars could not be seen and photographed. Pupils of the eyes would be too narrowed for this, the same applies to the camera diaphragm. In addition, the exposure time (exposure) when shooting a bright Apollo was too short for the film to fix the stars. If you increase the shutter speed, the film would be illuminated. Similar, illiterate objections are raised by other “whistleblowers” ​​due to the fact that there are no stars in the pictures from the Moon.

Atlantis is in orbit, there are no stars in the photo. Source of Is the astronaut Sally Kristen also included in the global "lunar deception program"?

At the same time, the Moonbreakers cling even to the words of the legendary cosmonaut Alexei Leonov, who firmly rejects the myth of lunar deception, which in one of his interviews said that, while in outer space, he saw the Sun and the stars. However, “whistleblowers” ​​always snatch out of context only what can be interpreted in a convenient way.

In this interview, Leonov said that the stars are visible outside the solid angle of about 300 degrees in the direction of the sun (meaning square degrees). The solid angle of 300 square meters. degrees is approximately 0.7% of the sky area. For comparison, the solid angle of the Sun (without a crown) cuts around 0.0005% on it. Thus, according to Leonov, stars can be seen in space by directing a line of sight about 20 solar diameters away from the sun. Since its angular diameter is close to 0.5 degrees, this corresponds to a deflection of the beam by 10 degrees.

It is doubtful that the estimate of 300 square meters. hail. was true, because in this case, the direct rays of the sun would have fallen into the eyes of Leonov. But he could well have been mistaken with the value of the solid angle, since This concept is used much less frequently than the usual angle. The scope is about 41,253 square meters. degrees, so it’s not so easy to give a rough estimate of the solid angle that drew the rich imagination of space artist Leonov.

But, speaking of this solid angle, he spread his hands to the sides by 150 degrees (see between 11:00 and 11:20 ). Maybe Leonov mistakenly multiplied 150 by 2, trying to estimate the value of the solid angle? Still, he is a pilot-cosmonaut, not a scientist, and at the time of the interview (2014) was already an old man. It could be something to mess up.

If we are guided by Leonov’s gesture with his hands, it follows from it that in open space one can see the stars, directing the view away from the Sun by 75 - 90 degrees. Which is quite natural, since in this case the sun's rays will not penetrate into the helmet.

Here is how he describes his impressions.
“Having selected the entire cable with radio wiring, covered with special insulation, I gently pushed off from the airlock. The moment came to which we were walking for so long - a man was floating in outer space. The ship rotated slowly, bathing in a sunny stream. Stars were everywhere: above, below, to the left and to the right. True, in space it is difficult to say where the top and where the bottom. But to work in space, you have to invent them. ”

Thus, Leonov saw the stars at the top, bottom, left and right. Obviously, the Sun and the ship were directly in front of him, because the airlock was turned away from the Sun. Therefore, he could observe the stars, turning his head up, down, left and right.

In the 1965 documentary video, the stars behind Leonov are not visible. Chaotic light spots on the film, obviously, are caused by cosmic rays. In this photo of the stars is also not visible - “deep blackness” around the shuttle, which excites Popov's revealing zeal.

Other complaints about the Apollo 13 image are related to computer processing.
“It turns out that if using a computer to adjust the brightness and contrast of the image, then in the upper right corner of the picture, part 1 appears, similar to some kind of casing. It is surrounded by a perimeter radiance 2. On Earth, such a halo arises around bright sources due to the scattering of light on specks of dust flying in the air. In space, there is no dust and no ghosting should be. In the shadow of 3 you can see that the light comes exactly from the casing, so similar to the back wall of the studio illuminator. And it became obvious that it was not in space that it crashed and this “service module” was removed. ”

There is no explanation of how exactly the brightness and contrast of a completely black background, on which Apollo 13 was shot, was adjusted. And what does this "adjustment" mean? Therefore, there is no reason to trust the “reconstructed” image on the right, as well as Popov’s fabrications based on it.

Another claim to the photo is related to the fact that the Apollo 13 service module looks rotated in relation to the combination of the lunar and command modules into which the crew moved. For some reason, Popov is certain that the crippled service module could not get a torque when disconnecting. In addition, the apparent rotation can be enhanced by the effect of perspective on photos. Here again there is the maniacal desire of the Lunoborians to pass off everything that they do not understand as revelations. “If I can’t understand this without wasting my time on thinking and time searching for information, then this has never happened” - this is the main principle of their schizophrenic methodology!

As an epilogue

From the expeditions of the "Apollo" separates us already almost half a century. The further this great epoch goes into the past, the more the crazy idea that moon flights were staged by the USA with the help of the USSR is spreading to the masses.

Assume that the re-enactment took place. Without the direct complicity of all countries that had the technical ability to receive Apollo telecasts and radio broadcasts, this could not be done.

The fact is that the angular velocity of the rotation of satellites around the Earth is significantly higher than that of the Moon (this follows, for example, from Kepler’s 2 law). Therefore, in the few hours that each communication session with the crew lasted, any satellite would have gone far off the line connecting the antenna on Earth to the landing site of the lunar module. And this would be noticeable (see the estimate of the angular error below). But no one noticed anything suspicious during all 9 manned missions to the Moon, 6 of which were disembarking to the surface!

Lunobortsy are trying to refute the arguments about the impossibility of simulating signals from the moon by means of satellites, arguing that it is possible to suspend the repeater at the Lagrange point between the Earth and the Moon. This is the point where lunar gravity is equal to Earth's. It is removed from the moon at about 38 000 km, from the Earth about 342 000 km. Consider this possibility, although the delivery of the repeater to the Lagrange point differs little in terms of energy consumption from its delivery to the Moon.


Here L is the Lagrange point, the distances AL and LB are 38,000 and 342,000 km (approximately). The radius of the moon is about 1,750 km. The landing sites of Apollo 12 and 17 are separated from each other by about the magnitude of the lunar radius, if you count in a straight line between these points (see the photograph of the Moon in the article). It can be seen that the false signal from Apollo 12 would be defined as coming from the landing site of Apollo 17! The angular error would be 2 - 2.5 degrees.

Thus, the repeater at the Lagrange point would not mislead the USSR, which could accurately determine the places on the moon from which the transmissions came. This idea - the same nonsense, like all the other speculations of the Moonriars.

Landing Apollo on the moon. The red circle is the landing area of ​​the Chinese lunar rover. Jade hare.

The complexity of such a drama would be little different from real missions, because I would have to plant automatic stations and, with the help of robots, arrange angular reflectors in different places (which are still used for laser location of the Moon by all interested countries).

In this case, the risk of exposure would be enormous, because probability theory does not allow to repeat such complex “scams” ​​9 times in a row. As the Soviet cosmonaut Feoktistov, Doctor of Technical Sciences and Intellectual, said about this:
"Too complicated and too funny!"

Thus, it was impossible to stage the Apollo program without the direct complicity of "all mankind". And how would the United States silence everyone, including China and the USSR? In China, by the way, at that time it already had its own thermonuclear bomb and an air defense system. There is no doubt that they could listen with interest to the conversations of astronauts with Houston. Not to mention the USSR, which had a powerful system of distant space communications and was most interested in catching the United States on deception ... but there was nothing to catch them!

What only nonsense do not compose moonborers to explain the alleged lunar conspiracy! For example, the supply of bread in exchange for silence, without which the Union was dying of starvation. This is the same illiterate stupidity as the other fabrications of the “whistleblowers”. In contrast to today's Russia, which is completely dependent on imports, the USSR was completely self-sufficient. Although traded, but in principle produced everything necessary (as the United States today and always). And hunger in our country in the 60s - 80s did not threaten even once.

But walking for a walk, let's say it is ... It's unclear how, but the United States managed to put locks on its mouth to everyone who had access to information about the moon race. Including all astronauts without exception!

Many of them have already passed away. For example, the deceased this year, Grechko, who strongly denied speculation about the lunar scam. What prevented at least one of the USSR cosmonauts from telling the “truth” before dying, when there was nothing to be afraid of? Just writing a post on the social network.

Russia would loudly applaud such a confession and carry a hero in her arms. But everyone is silent to the grave as partisans are being interrogated. Is it because they just know the truth? But the truth is that the Americans were still on the moon, whether someone likes it or not!

Now about why the "exposures of the lunar deception" are gaining so much popularity.

One of the reasons is obvious - anti-Americanism. Anyone who hates the United States enthusiastically takes any speculation on this topic on faith. In Russia of the 21st century, anti-Americanism is the basis of state ideology. Therefore, the overwhelming majority of Russians already "know for sure" that the flights to the moon were filmed in Hollywood.

Fragment from Kubrick's masterpiece, which „made Apollo flights to the Moon“.

The second and no less important reason is the Internet. He gave an opportunity to absolutely everyone - incl. to eccentrics, fools, and scammers, to publicly express and disseminate opinions that, until the mid-90s, did not extend beyond the kitchen. And by the end of the XX century began!

This system works like this. Someone read somewhere that, for example, the American flag on the moon fluttered like in the wind. I watched the video and for sure - the flag seemed to be swaying. And all - NASA is caught red-handed! So stupid that they didn’t even guess to remove the fan from the pavilion or just to reshoot the scene))

How could the incredibly meticulous perfectionist Kubrick, who is credited with shooting the Space Odyssey of 1968, allow such an absurd mistake in such a serious matter? In "Space Odyssey 2001" a great director strictly follows the laws of physics in every detail! For example, scenes with a spacewalk were filmed in complete silence, broken only by the astronaut's snooping into the microphone (1968). By the way, these were real sounds that Alexey Leonov made during his spacewalk.

And you are ready to believe that Kubrick did not know about the absence of wind on the moon ?! But lunoborts logic is alien. This is a sect whose members do not wish to think for they BELIEVE. But faith and reason are incompatible! In addition, most people rarely use the brain.They saw in the network a caricature collage or animation on the theme of "lunar deception", happily giggled and ... strengthened their faith, as if they had an irrefutable testimony.

To understand the absurdity of the speculations about Stanley Kubrick, it is enough to compare his masterpiece about the Space Odyssey, where people walk on the Moon, like on the Earth, with authentic shots of astronaut jumps. Nothing in common! With all the scientific accuracy of his film, he could not recreate lunar physics - computer graphics developed to this only in the 21st century.

If a moonbearer wanted to understand what is actually happening with the flag on the moon, he would have noticed that the flag is hanging on the L-shaped stand. It is to ensure that the rag does not hang. The rack hesitates, and the flag swings from her. It hesitates quite strongly, as if it should not be so. And why should not actually? Because on Earth, the box would not hesitate? But doesn't it prove the fact that everything happened on the moon?

Instead of searching for an answer to a question that he personally does not understand, the moonbearer hurries to chirp to the whole world that “Pindos are completely deceived”)) And such waves of stupidity are poured on the Web, leading weak minds to the “True Faith”.

D.Sc. (not a physicist, but a mathematician) Dmitry Zotev.


All Articles