Kontakt     Hauptseite     zurück
previous chapterprevious     nextnext chapter
D     ESP

"Moon plays": The moon was the Earth - Lies and Truth in the Atmosphere

27. Much too precise Apollo landings on Earth - the probability of airdrops

Useful cargo aircrafts to perform precise splashdowns to pretend landings from "moon flights"

Airdrop with a cargo
                  aircraft, sight from the bottom, drawingApollo
                  17 splashdown
Airdrop an splashdown, here from Apollo 17.
The result is a cheap "moon landing"...

by Michael Palomino (2006 / 2010)

Share:

Facebook






from:
-- Gerhard Wisnewski: Lügen im Weltraum [Lies in Space]; Knaur 2005
-- Internet: v.a. http://en.wikipedia.com: Splashdown


The wind makes with the landing capsule what he wants

The landing on Earth with a landing capsule on a parachute begins with the re-entry into the lower, dense atmosphere and from this point can hardly be steered. The landings in the "American" atmosphere were all performed in the sea, so it was a "splashdown".

Factors for a landing of the landing capsule with a parachute are:

-- the point of re-entry with about 8 km per second [~28,800 km per hour]

-- little mistakes have big aberrations for consequence

-- the landing capsule is not steerable (Wisnewski, p.235).

The Apollo landings are said to have performed even without an Earth orbit before directly from the "moon flight", with almost 12 km per second [~ ca. 40,000 km per hour], so this would be 50 % faster than from an Earth orbit (Wisnewski, p.235).

At this time during the "moon landings" [which were performed in the simulation centers] there is no GPS (Wisnewski, p.236), there is no instrumental landing system, and visual landing is not possible either. Factors for the parachute are air temperature, air density and the wind. The parachutes of the space capsule are opened e.b. for Apollo 11 in a height of 7.5 km (23,000 feet). The wind can do with the capsule what he wants

(In: http://apollomaniacs.web.infoseek.co.jp/apollo/flight11e.htm; Wisnewski, S.236)

[and the astronauts can only hope for a soon rescue by helicopter or by ship].

Considering these circumstances it's absolutely impossible to score a planned landing point of only a few kilometers. Aberrations of 100s up to 1,000s of km are normal. The landing aberrations in the Russian atmosphere flight were as bit that they had even landings in China (Wisnewski, p.236). The landings of the performed Gemini flights e.g. are planned in a landing area ("footprint") of 550 by 90 km (Wisnewski, p.239).

The "lucky hit" during a landing - precise airdrops with cargo aircrafts and parachute extraction system


So, when precise landings under 10 km aberration are happening this is a "lucky hit". But when several precise landings under 10 km aberration in series are performed, so this "lucky hit" has got "an other" cause: Then it's probable that there has an airdrop of the capsule performed over the landing point with a cargo aircraft in a high height as it was exercised in training for 1,000s of times (Wisnewski, p.242-243).

These airdrops are a usual procedure during Vietnam war already.
(e.g. http://hometown.aol.com/samblu82/menu4.html)

From big "Hercules" cargo aircrafts not only supply goods but even cars and tanks are dropped.
(http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-130.htm)
Airdrop schema
Airdrop schema

Airdrop, exercise.
vergrössernAirdrop, exercise.
Airdrop with a cargo aircraft, sight from
                        the bottom, drawing
Airdrop with a cargo aircraft, sight from the bottom, drawing.


Example: Airdrop of a tank
Airdrop of a
                        tank is prepared, the ramp is opened
Airdrop of a tank is prepared, the ramp is opened
Airdrop: Sight from the inner to
                            outwards with the airdrop ramp (no tank).
vergrössernAirdrop: Sight from the inner to outwards with the airdrop ramp (no tank).
Airdrop of a tank
                        "Sheridan" from a Hercules C-5, the
                        parachutes are partly closed yet.
Airdrop of a tank "Sheridan" from a Hercules C-5, the parachutes are partly closed yet.
Airdrop of a tank "Sheridan",
                          the parachutes are open.
vergrössernAirdrop of a tank "Sheridan", the parachutes are open.


The same one can do with supply goods or even with landing capsules of "moon rockets". From a highest height the landing capsule is dropped, and the public means the capsule comes back "from the moon"...


Examples: The splashdowns of the "USA" and the realistic aberrations from the planned landing points

28 May 1959: Jupiter AM-18: ? km

9 Sep 1959: Mercury capsule "Big Joe": 925 km

4 Dec 1959: Mercury capsule "Little Joe 2": ? km

19 Dec 1960: Mercury capsule "Redstone 1A": 33 km

31 Jan 1961: Mercury capsule "Redstone 2": 111 km

21 Feb 1961: Mercury capsule "Atlas 2": 30 km ?

13 Sep 1961: Mercury capsule "Atlas 4": 63 km

29 Nov 1961: Mercury capsule "Atlas 5": 48 km

19 Jan 1965: Gemini capsule 2: 26 km

26 Feb 1966: Apollo capsule 201: 72 km

25 Aug 1966: Apollo capsule 202: 370 km

3 Nov 1966: Gemini capsule 2-MOL: 13 km

9 Nov 1967: Apollo capsule 4: 16 km

4 April 1968: Apollo capsule 6: 80 km

(In: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splashdown (August 2006); Wisnewski, p.238)


The splashdowns of the landing capsules of the "USA" after the airdrops

According to the data the "American" space flight has very precise landings since Gemini 6A. Also the first two flights "in space" (from Shepard and Grissom 1961) are unusual precise landings.

The points of the splashdowns:

Splashdowns of the "US" atmosphere
                program in the Atlantic near the Bahamas, map
Splashdowns of the "US" atmosphere program in the Atlantic near the Bahamas, map

Splashdowns in the
                "US" atmosphere program in the Pacific in the
                Southern Sea, map
Splashdowns in the "US" atmosphere program in the Pacific in the Southern Sea, map

According to Wisnewski the systematic fake began with Gemini 9A. According to the latest data of Wikipedia Gemini 5 was the last manned atmosphere flight and the systematic fake began already with Gemini 6A. For other airdrops are little differences.

Table: Landings of atmosphere ships of the "USA"

Aberration of the landing capsule during the landing

Conclusion

 

Wisnewski (2005)

en.wikipedia (August 2006)

 

5 May 1961: Mercury capsule "Freedom 7" (astronaut Shepard, "first 'American' in space")

9.2 km

5.6 km

fake

21 July 1961: Mercury capsule "Liberty Bell" (astronaut Grissom, "second 'American' in space")

9.2 km

9.3 km

fake

20 Feb 1961: Mercury capsule "Friendship 7"

75.0 km

74 km

 

24 May 1962: Mercury capsule "Aurora 7"

400.0 km

400 km

 

3 Oct 1962: Mercury capsule "Sigma 7"

8.2 km

7.4 km

fake

16 May 1963: Mercury capsule "Faith 7"

6.4 km

8.1 km

fake

23 March 1965: Gemini capsule 3

111.1 km

111 km

 

7 June 1965: Gemini capsule 4

81.4 km

81 km

 

29 Aug 1965: Gemini capsule 5

170 km

270 km

 

16 Dec 1965: Gemini capsule 6A

12.9 km

13 km

fake

18 Dec 1965: Gemini capsule 7

11.8 km

12 km

fake

17 March 1966: Gemini capsule 8

330 km

2 km

fake

6 June 1966: Gemini capsule 9A

0.7 km

0.7 km

fake

21 July 1966: Gemini capsule 10

6.2 km

6 km

fake

15 Sep 1966: Gemini capsule 11

4.9 km

5 km

fake

15 Nov 1966: Gemini capsule 12

4.8 km

5 km

fake


(In: NASA; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splashdown; Wisnewski, p.237-238)


The scenario of a "moon landing": Empty rocket - waiting time - prepared capsule - airdrop

The impossibility to have splashdowns with a precision as it is shown above in the table with a landing capsule with parachute after a "moon flight" makes it probable that these were simple airdrops as it was trained in training 1,000s of times before. The rocket with a capsule was empty and was brought down discreetly. The astronauts were waiting at a hidden point. Shortly before the announced landing they had to climb into a prepared landing capsule which had to look like a capsule after a "re-entry". The capsule with the astronauts was brought in a high height with a cargo aircraft and was dropped over the ramp over the landing point like in training.

The show was perfect, the media believed all, and only the top 5 or 10 people and the astronauts knew about the fraud. The control center was not a control center but the simulation centers in connection with CIA had the full control over the control center. One of the most important simulation centers at Langley (near Hampton, Virginia) was at the same place as the headquarters of the CIA: at Langley (near Hampton, Virginia).

This is NO conspiracy theory, stupid journalist, but these are facts.


The impossible precise Apollo landings - probable airdrops

The manned Apollo capsules have an average of aberration of only 3 km. This precision of landing after "moon flights" seems to be absolutely impossible (Wisnewski, p.238), when at the same time the Apollo capsule shall have come with the 1.5 fold speed to the Earth as with a normal Earth orbit, and if there was no Earth orbit before the landing any more (Wisnewski, p.235).

Apolo 17 fake:
                The splashdown is precise and only was an airdrop,
                nothing more
Apolo 17 fake: The splashdown is precise and only was an airdrop, nothing more

Table: Apollo atmosphere ships and their landings

Aberration of the landing capsule during the landing

Conclusion

22 Oct 1968: Apollo 7

3.5 km

fake

27 Dec 1968: Apollo 8

2.6 km

fake

13 March 1969: Apollo 9

5.0 km

fake

26 May 1969: Apollo 10

2.4 km

fake

24 July 1969: Apollo 11

3.1 km

fake

24 Nov 1969: Apollo 12

3.7 km

fake

17 April 1970: Apollo 13

1.9 km

fake

9 Feb 1971: Apollo 14

1.1 km

fake

7 Aug 1971: Apollo 15

1.9 km

fake

27 April 1972: Apollo 16

5.6 km

fake

19 Dec 1972: Apollo 17

1.9 km

fake


(In: NASA; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splashdown (August 2006); Wisnewski, S.238)

Apollo does not seem to be a technical development, but suddenly the landings are precise. And there is not one single failed landing in the Apollo landings (Wisnewski, p.239).

The capsules from an Earth orbit have an average of almost 80 km aberration. The capsules from an Earth orbit had been landed worse than the Apollo capsules from a "moon flight" without Earth orbit before the landing (with an average of aberration of only ca. 3 km). So, it's not possible that the Apollo flights were "moon flights" because there is not even the aberration of an Earth orbit flight (Wisnewski, p.240).

So, an Apollo flight consisted of an empty rocket, well prepared, blurred and manipulated films from the simulation centers, and by an airdrop with a hero ceremony at the end with the "President" (Nixon).

(In: Kaysing, Bill: We Never Went to the Moon: America's Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle; Pomeroy 2002; Wisnewski, p.242).

The capsules were dropped by cargo aircrafts. These drops were normal "training" (Wisnewski, p.243). The same procedure of an airdrop are the precise landings of the Gemini atmosphere ships. Ralph René e.g. watched that on the landed Gemini 6A capsule is sticking out an antenna which should have melted during re-entry  into the lower atmosphere (Wisnewski, p.242).

This is NO conspiracy theory, stupid journalist, but these are facts.


Fresh looking "moon astronauts" - or unknown people behind the helmets?

After the "landings" the astronauts of the Apollo "moon flights" do not look as they were stressed. Stress factors of a "moon landing" were:
-- zero gravity for 10 or 12 days
-- reduction of muscles
-- to be penned in narrow seats
-- space illnesses
-- bad food
-- special pressure circumstances
-- high exposure to radiation
-- strains for the body
-- disorientation during the re-entry into the atmosphere
-- rocking sea (Wisnewski, p.244).

But behind a helmet it's not possible to see which person comes out of the landing capsule. The astronauts do not put their helmets off. By this it's not possible to recognize the "moon astronauts" and there is no proof which astronaut was in the capsule. Officially the "moon astronauts" were lead to an examination shortly after the landing and nobody had seen the faces of the people coming out from the landing capsules. After that the "moon astronauts" are shown in quarantine suits (Wisnewski, p.245).

[So, all possible proofs are destroyed during the landing which would hinder any speculations. But the "moon astronauts" will be celebrated every time on ceremonies in N.Y. in the "Canyon of heroes" in an open cabriolet, and "President" Nixon can be safe to have the mood of the public on his side for this moment and stands himself in the car like a "hero" though it's proved that not one single "moon landing" has been really performed resp. "moon landings" had been only in TV...]

previous chapterprevious     nextnext chapter





Picture sources

-- Apollo 17 splashdown: http://history.msfc.nasa.gov/saturn_apollo/photos/pages/10076001_jpg.htm

-- airdrop, schema: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/90-26/Ch4.htm

-- airdrop, sight from the bottom, drawing:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/90-26/Ch4.htm

-- airdrop, exercise: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-130.htm;
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-130-lapes-2.jpg

-- airdrop, sight from the inner side to the outside: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-130.htm:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-130-dfst9110084.jpg

-- airdrop of a tank is prepared, the ramp is open: http://82ndarmor.ieasysite.com/sheridan_010.htm

-- airdrop of a tank, the parachutes are closed yet: http://82ndarmor.ieasysite.com/sheridan_010.htm

-- airdrop of a tank, the parachutes are open: http://82ndarmor.ieasysite.com/sheridan_003.htm

-- map of the splashdowns of the flight program of the "USA" in the Atlantic and in the Pacific:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splashdown_%28spacecraft_landing%29

^