How did astronauts get past the Van Allen Belts in 1969?

did they go through the Van Allen belts in 1969-1972?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 11 73.3%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 4 26.7%

  • Total voters
    15

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,815
Likes
8,365
#1
Apollo Program
1969 to 1972
Apollo_program.png
How many times has the human race stepped on the Moon?
  • 6 times. All being the Apollo programs. Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, 16 and 17 respectively between 1969 and 1972.
How they got past Van Allen Belts.
Popular Science: "There was no shortage of threats facing Apollo astronauts on missions to the Moon. Like radiation. Specifically, the dense radiation environment of the Van Allen belts that surround our planet. When it launched Apollo missions through the Van Allen belts on a path to the Moon, NASA didn’t just hope for the best. The agency had studied the “Van Allen problem” as it were, knew the risks, and made the decision to go anyway. And not one astronaut died from passing through the Van Allen Belts."

Popular Mechanics: "It's always difficult being the first, especially when you're going into space. The Apollo program encountered many difficulties on its trip to the Moon, ranging from mechanical to astrophysics. The issue of the Van Allen belt and its radioactivity was a particularly serious concern while planning the mission. Fortunately, it was a problem with a solution, one that involved skirting the most dangerous parts of the belt, and making sure the astronauts got through it as quickly as humanly possible."

Clavius: Yes, there is deadly radiation in the Van Allen belts, but the nature of that radiation was known to the Apollo engineers and they were able to make suitable preparations. The principle danger of the Van Allen belts is high-energy protons, which are not that difficult to shield against. And the Apollo navigators plotted a course through the thinnest parts of the belts and arranged for the spacecraft to pass through them quickly, limiting the exposure.

Huff Post: "The answer, simply, and which has been explained in detail elsewhere, is that the Apollo astronauts were not in the Van Allen belt for long enough to have to deal with dangerous levels of exposure to radiation. The Apollo astronauts did return to Earth having been exposed to significant radiation - but not more than is allowed by US law for workers at nuclear power stations, for instance."

Van Allen radiation belt - Wikipedia
21st century
21st_century_nasa.jpg



Conspiracy debunking: The Van Allen Belts and Travel to the Moon

* * * * *
What do you think, did they go through the Van Allen belts in 1969-1972?

KD: :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 

Casimir

Active member
Messages
28
Likes
114
#2
You will enjoy Dave McGowan's 14 part write-up on the inconsistencies of the moon landings.

This is the moon lander, somehow this rickety and flimsy looking pile of tin detached from the main craft landed on the moon and also protected the astronauts from radiation and, well, all the other deadly debris floating around waiting to rend your craft asunder in space- oh and then it blasted off the surface of the moon and made it all the way back to couple with the main craft.

I always was a firm believer in the fact we went to the moon, until I spent any time at all looking into the inconsistencies. Dave's blog does a good job explaining them, the fact its a blog and he can get a little smug at times is annoying but the content is irrefutable.

Wagging the Moondoggie

lunar_landing_module_1_1.jpg

lunar_landing_module_2_1.jpg

lunar_landing_module_3_1.jpg
 

Casimir

Active member
Messages
28
Likes
114
#4
Aha, I will be more diligent confirming I'm not posting already-posted content in the future. Have loved lurking the site the past few weeks or so, lots of compelling questions around here.

I imagine people at NASA standing with sheets of tinfoil having people shoot bb guns at them simulating the protection offered on the lander
 

Ice Nine

Well-known member
Messages
396
Likes
1,559
#5
Is that really what they expect us to believe is the moon lander? I thought it was a poor man's representation of what it looked like. I think I could go to the local craft store and then make something like that myself.
 

MinLo66

Active member
Messages
29
Likes
116
#7
You will enjoy Dave McGowan's 14 part write-up on the inconsistencies of the moon landings.

This is the moon lander, somehow this rickety and flimsy looking pile of tin detached from the main craft landed on the moon and also protected the astronauts from radiation and, well, all the other deadly debris floating around waiting to rend your craft asunder in space- oh and then it blasted off the surface of the moon and made it all the way back to couple with the main craft.

I always was a firm believer in the fact we went to the moon, until I spent any time at all looking into the inconsistencies. Dave's blog does a good job explaining them, the fact its a blog and he can get a little smug at times is annoying but the content is irrefutable.

Wagging the Moondoggie

Love me some Dave McGowan writing! This particular series was especially telling.
I always believed we went but there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary. That NASA has since apparently confessed to "losing the Moonlanding records" AND also admitted they "no longer have the ability" or whatever to safely pass thru the VAB is even more preposterous and outrageous than the initial lies told and played out for us to watch on The Television oh so many, many years ago...
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
743
Likes
1,997
#8
I remember years ago asking the question about how the astronauts survived the VAB radiation and was told about the shielding in their suits. I then asked why, if the suits protect from radiation, we don't have people don space suits and go in to clean up Chernobyl. No answer.

I don't think we went when we originally said we did but I'm curious about the reflector that scientists shoot laser beams off of that supposedly exists on the moon from one of our trips. I guess the Chinese will let us know if it's possible soon enough. Maybe they'll loan us their "how-to" manual since we seem to have lost ours. Top secret facility with security out the wazoo and we LOSE all evidence of man's greatest achievement EVER? Sounds legit. I had my doubts about the moon landing hoax conspiracy but when NASA said they lost all the documentation, ALL OF IT!, I began to suspect the crazy conspirators might be on to something.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,815
Likes
8,365
#9
With the amount of inconsistencies you would think there had to be some congressional hearing held long time ago.

How about this one. Ever thought of why astronauts train in a swimming pool vs a vacuum chamber?
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
743
Likes
1,997
#10
No, I'd not considered that but it does make sense in that a swimming pool will offer resistance to help build muscle mass, lung capacity, and endurance to be able to longer tolerate the debilitating effects of zero gravity whereas training in a vacuum chamber would not (and would require special equipment).
Honestly, anything having to do with astronomy has not been much of an area of interest for me. Astronomers, astrophysicists, et al could make up absolutely anything having to do with the "science" and we wouldn't be able to prove or disprove any of it. I look at that field of study like it's a religion requiring faith to believe any of it.
 
OP
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
2,815
Likes
8,365
#11
This is almost a textbook answer. Pretty much what they would want us to think I would imagine.

In reality everywhere else it is a “Train as you Fight” mentality.

If astronauts need to work on their physical shape during mission task practicing, they should not be astronauts.

There is no water in space, or at least they tell us there is none. Unless their ISS is an outer firmament waters submersible.

Vacuum they say is out there. It makes exactly ZERO sense to train in a swimming pool when your mission is in the space vacuum conditions. Only vacuum environment would make sense.

Allegedly there are vacuum chambers out there. Nasa itself has a pretty big one. With 20bln dollar budget and the importance of “real world” training, there should be no reason astronauts and cosmonauts train in a pool filled with water.

I think the reason they do not train inside a vacuum chamber could be fairly simple. They do not want to die. Those space suits they constantly use outside of the ISS will most likely fail inside a vacuum chamber here on Earth.

1966 it was? Taught them well probably. Jim LeBlanc Survives Spacesuit Vacuum Test Gone Wrong

I think it was Rob Skiba, who challenged any of the astronauts to bring their best space suit to an independent university vacuum chamber and spend a few minutes inside the chamber.

With all the mistrust and rumors circulating, you would think NASA would be eager to prove that their suits actually work.

Would they ever provide a suit and a person to test it independently ? I do not think so, and there can only be one real reason why they would not. Pretty sure they could find hundreds of plausible reasons not to do it.

I would like to see some proof of those space suits actually doing what they are supposed to. As it stands, I have strong doubts about that.
 

dreamtime

Well-known member
Messages
262
Likes
1,352
#12
You usually train for something in a way to imitate as much as possible what you train for, imho.

I can think of those possibilities:

- Space is actually water, and there is something that prevents the water from coming down
- The swimming pools are actually the places where some things are filmed that are afterwards sold to us as real space footage, often with the astronauts actually thinking they are only training. It's the perfect cover up
 

ISeenItFirst

Well-known member
Messages
459
Likes
842
#14
I remember years ago asking the question about how the astronauts survived the VAB radiation and was told about the shielding in their suits. I then asked why, if the suits protect from radiation, we don't have people don space suits and go in to clean up Chernobyl. No answer.

I don't think we went when we originally said we did but I'm curious about the reflector that scientists shoot laser beams off of that supposedly exists on the moon from one of our trips. I guess the Chinese will let us know if it's possible soon enough. Maybe they'll loan us their "how-to" manual since we seem to have lost ours. Top secret facility with security out the wazoo and we LOSE all evidence of man's greatest achievement EVER? Sounds legit. I had my doubts about the moon landing hoax conspiracy but when NASA said they lost all the documentation, ALL OF IT!, I began to suspect the crazy conspirators might be on to something.
Because nothing radio active at Chernobyl. The little bit there was was removed immediately, following strict and stringent exposure protocols. The only injuries or deaths were sustained by the initial fire fighters who responded. All global "fallout" samples fabricated.

Moondoggies explanation of the rate of manufacture for the Apollo suits vs current suits was the most damning bit about the suits to me. The difference in manhours is astounding.
 

MinLo66

Active member
Messages
29
Likes
116
#15
This is almost a textbook answer. Pretty much what they would want us to think I would imagine.

In reality everywhere else it is a “Train as you Fight” mentality.

If astronauts need to work on their physical shape during mission task practicing, they should not be astronauts.

There is no water in space, or at least they tell us there is none. Unless their ISS is an outer firmament waters submersible.

Vacuum they say is out there. It makes exactly ZERO sense to train in a swimming pool when your mission is in the space vacuum conditions. Only vacuum environment would make sense.

Allegedly there are vacuum chambers out there. Nasa itself has a pretty big one. With 20bln dollar budget and the importance of “real world” training, there should be no reason astronauts and cosmonauts train in a pool filled with water.

I think the reason they do not train inside a vacuum chamber could be fairly simple. They do not want to die. Those space suits they constantly use outside of the ISS will most likely fail inside a vacuum chamber here on Earth.

1966 it was? Taught them well probably. Jim LeBlanc Survives Spacesuit Vacuum Test Gone Wrong

I think it was Rob Skiba, who challenged any of the astronauts to bring their best space suit to an independent university vacuum chamber and spend a few minutes inside the chamber.

With all the mistrust and rumors circulating, you would think NASA would be eager to prove that their suits actually work.

Would they ever provide a suit and a person to test it independently ? I do not think so, and there can only be one real reason why they would not. Pretty sure they could find hundreds of plausible reasons not to do it.

I would like to see some proof of those space suits actually doing what they are supposed to. As it stands, I have strong doubts about that.
Absolutely, as should we all...and although space and NASA are not really ever at the forefront of my mind, my thoughts go something like this: Well paid and well programmed Bloodline Quality Actors, who are at certain times paraded around public venues for "press" conferences or "on set" wearing "space" suits and floating around in a big rocket ship that may or may not take off from The Big Space Station at some point with any of them in it... More Bread and Circus for The Masses while NASA serves as the Govermental Front used to pour literally Trillions of $ into each year for what they claim is The NASA Budget to use for things like Space Warfare Research and Astronautic Swimming Lessons so none of us Dummies will ever discover much less question whether those NASA Budget funds are really being used by our Government for Black Ops against and terrorist attacks on its own Citizenry.
 

MeNTaLMoNKeY

Active member
Messages
25
Likes
117
#16
How about this one. Ever thought of why astronauts train in a swimming pool vs a vacuum chamber?
No, I'd not considered that but it does make sense in that a swimming pool will offer resistance to help build muscle mass, lung capacity, and endurance to be able to longer tolerate the debilitating effects of zero gravity whereas training in a vacuum chamber would not (and would require special equipment).
Honestly, anything having to do with astronomy has not been much of an area of interest for me. Astronomers, astrophysicists, et al could make up absolutely anything having to do with the "science" and we wouldn't be able to prove or disprove any of it. I look at that field of study like it's a religion requiring faith to believe any of it.
I agree 100% that anything to do with space is equivalent to religion as nothing can be confirmed or refuted. All we can do is either believe the NASA priests or not, but there's no way to be sure whether anything is true.

As for training in swimming pools, the only thing similar between a swimming pool and being in low gravity space is the weightlessness aspect of it. However, aside from the weightlessness aspect they're quite dis-similar. Being in a pool full of water will introduce significant resistance against your movements, where an absence of everything in a vacuum would be the exact opposite and you'd move more freely, even compared to being on land in our atmosphere. Yes, it would help to build muscle mass of which you could then afford to lose some of in low gravity space, but doing simulation training in an environment that will feel nothing like your destination environment makes little sense.
 
Messages
9
Likes
52
#17
I don’t know much about how space (supposedly) works or vacuums really, I’ll admit that. But I had a thought or rather a question. (I have a lot of questions about space and the information we’re told, but that’s all off of this topic...)

In regards to the ISS and space being a vacuum and all of that... not long ago they had that hole. I’m sure we all remember hearing about that what, a month ago? A hole they’re not sure how it got there. A hole they didn’t tell the crew about until they all woke up because it “wasn’t dangerous”. A hole one of the astronauts just plugged with his finger. Until they temporarily fixed it with tape.

Would any of that even be possible? I understand the ISS is big enough where maybe it would depressurize so slow it’d be okay, but I’d still imagine you couldn’t just stick your finger in a hole straight into space like that...
 
Top