NASA engineer admits they can’t get passed the Van Allen Belts 

Lv J, I literally laughed out loud sitting here by myself! Well done...

Kkkk haha THEY NEVER BEEN MOON JUST MOVIE AND FOOLS BELIEVED ALL RETARDED PEOPLE BELIEVE GOVERNMENT LIES

😁😁😂😂😁😀😀😁😁🎯🎯🎯

Hahaha

@@PointToTheKing so did I

The technology is the same. Big rockets, small spacecraft made as light as possible. The challenges he talks about are engineering ones. We know how, but did we build a craft that is capable. That is what the test flight is for, people make mistakes.

"We must solve these challenges before sending humans through this region of space" When man went to the moon, they did their best to avoid those regions. The Van Allen belt is not just a belt but belts of various radiation intensity. When they went through it back then, they did so as fast as they could and through radiation regions that weren't as strong as others to minimize their exposure, not completely eliminate it. They couldn't. They were still exposed to levels of radiation when they did this, but they weren't there for long enough for them to be lethal in the short term. For that they would have had to have been in them for days and they were only in them for about an hour. It's been said that the level of radiation exposure they experienced on average was equivalent to having two head x-rays.

Nope, the opposite. Modern technology relies on advanced computers that are highly sensitive to ionizing radiation. Humans are quite resilient. That is even more the case with the analogue technology that the astronauts used back then. What is even more resilient against ionizing radiation is a fucking shovel. Does that mean that a fucking spade is far more high tech than a modern computer?

"But Orion HAS PROTECTION the shielding will be put to the test. Sensors will record..." lets all forget the previous line right before that one!

Electro-Cute just whip out the 33 kilobytes that they use the 1969 and get the shit done!! Pretty sure we can re-engineer 1960s equipment/hardware🤔

take a course in basic electromagnetics and radio theory then rethink that.

Calling the White House from the moon?! I guess you have it the other way Dick called The moon

Pffft it was a VIDEO CALL back in '69! You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave the film studio! @_@

Wrong it went from the White House to Houston then to the moon

look at a globe and find the indian ocean. then find the US. also, learn about radio technology and was the plasma (when the capsule enter the atmosphere at high speeds) does to electromagnetic radiation (radio waves, numpty). look, knowing nothing isn’t something you should share in. such a loud manner in public. keep it to yourself, conspiraceeh nutter

Edward S Winfrey there you go... comon sens. Funny how people resent that simple fact. 🤷🏻‍♂️

@@SebMenard oh for fuck sake No, we did. We just used multiple different techniques to get around the van Allen belts. 1. In 1969 we used reflective material to deflect some of the radiation. 2. The van allen belt is made of charged particles, not alpha, beta, or gamma radiation. In other words, it wont kill you, although if you're not careful you can get cancer later in life. The van allen belts are not interchangeable with a nuclear reactor. Charged particles are composed of protons rather than neutrons which has ben shown to be less damaging on tissue. 3. They used fine corse corrections to avoid some of the heaviest parts of the radioactive zone. Using these corse corrections they were able to significantly reduce radiation. This will be impossible for Orion as it needs to be very fine in order to stay on the correct interplanetary trajectory. 4. They still didnt do it right! In recent years apollo astronauts have died of cancer, so when we venture out into space, we want to eliminate the likelihood that astronauts will die of cancer. Conclusion: as it turns out, rocket science is COMPLICATED and cannot be explained away with some basic facts you took off wikipedia.

@@SebMenard I've noticed that "moon landing deniers" and other conspiracy theorists can't spell. Do you think that's a coincidence, or do you think it's because they're stupid?

It looks to me that the Van Allen Belt is concentrated dangerous radiation and everyone accepts that. Astronauts can pass through it quickly. My problem is the radiation beyond the belt which is less intense but still dangerous. Astronauts must be in it for very long times. Four days would be a long time in it. Hopefully this mission will test it out. If space radiation us a severe as I suspect, it might never be possible to go beyond low earth orbit.

They just hauled ass through it and hoped for the best

Spencer Jarvis these are unmanned tests for long duration...

There are also weak and strong points in the belt. Ideally you want to go through a weak area

A Sleigh Ride In my 64 you don’t get that choice if you need to go through them for days to slingshot to deep space...

You cannot avoid them. That is why they did NOT go in 69. Why are they going through them or attempting them now? First the orion is unmanned. The radiation is so intense they cannot overcome that as of yet.

icoltsi18 you can take a reduced radiation route, but not if you intend to go further than the moon... Orion will be tested unmanned, but eventually will be manned and yes they’ll have no choice but to take the more direct and higher radiation route...

Definitely a new chapter, but still sci fi🤣🤣🤣

Still no space exist so only sci fi can take you to fake space . Respect

I loved this!

@@TruthhurtsYa HA hA HA HA/. Ok flerf

@@pasisovi Ah yes, idiots are typically amused easily. 🤣

Not very well, well kinda, some radiation managed to get through lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/Experiment/exper/380

TheReviewsDOTnet it was sarcastic lol

can't tell through text. (After looking at it I see)

For 100MeV, a 6 feet thick shell of Cadmium around the cubicle might do the trick, but what should the rocket engine thrust be?.

TheReviewsDOTnet hahahahahahahahaha are u kidding me? GODDDDDDD

They must solve those challenges for their particular spacecraft. Apollo certainly solved it for theirs. It's not necessarily an apples to apples comparison. And as long as there aren't crazy solar flares or other solar activity and as long as you pass through the Van Allen belts at the right angle with high speed It's really not super dangerous.

@@scubastevedan Oh...so they solved in in 1969 with ease, but, couldn't solve it for this one in present day. Very, very interesting.

@@MichaelGrubbEvolvedMinistry no, they did NOT solve it with ease. They solved it with Blood Sweat and Tears and a few people died in the process. Through trial and error they made small steps and eventually giant leaps. Today, were trying new methods with new technology and were on a tight budget and NASA is building a rocket out of spare parts. Please "do your research" as the other conspiracy theorists like to say, preferably before commenting.

@@MichaelGrubbEvolvedMinistry "but, couldn't solve it for this one in present day". Who told you that it couldn't be solved? The Orion spacecraft test in Dec 2022 went very well. Take care.

What makes you think there isn't?

Also a Buc ees

There are two factors here: Orion is not the apollo craft. It's a new piece of tech. Obviously they have to test that it holds up in the field before trusting it to keep humans alive. Secondly, as electronics have gotten better they've gotten smaller, and the current in them has gotten less as well. That means they're much more vulnerable to radiation, so we need to shield them.

@@@seigeengine: But what about the latest mars mission (Insight lander). They sent them without problems with "new" electronics, so what's the problem?

@@virgilsebaa3660 Well, on one hand, robots are just so much cheaper, and no humans are onboard to lose, but also that they're smaller, so easier to harden and test, and can largely just be turned off while passing through.

@@seigeengine I aws talking about electronics. The Nasa talk about protecting computers. It's supose to work at this time no????

@@virgilsebaa3660 I am aware you were talking about electronics. Are you actually stupid enough to think that just because we've made cars drive safely new cars shouldn't be tested?

SIGUY E 👍

@@alexandredp Really?? 🤔🤔🤔

No, the guys is saying this is something you have to solve for each craft.

Jesse Duzz you’re making a strong case for looking for evidence but then quote from the bible. Can’t you see your own hypocrisy

A DP the government doesn’t give a damn about us or you.. you’d have to be a fool to trust them.

Do I look like I'm Edgar Mitchell to answer that question for you?

First of all, I believe that was Alan Bean Second, don't trust that interview because the creator's a known fraud. The creator has been caught lying about his evidence and manipulating his footage multiple times. It's heavily suspected that Bart Sibrel asked about Bean's trip to Skylab, America's first space station, then edited out the context clues to pass off the comment as being about Apollo to frame him. You'll notice that there's a cut away in the middle of his sentence. And it was "I don't think we went that far" Edit "If we did, it wasn't a problem. And no, this is not grasping at straws. Bart's got caught red-handed pulling bullshit like that before. Third, you do realize that the astronauts probably don't know as much about the belts as the technicians right? Their job is to fly the ship. The Hows and Whys of the belts would be handled by the people on the ground so while they may know of them, they may not know the details very well. Especially since they're all of the age where a significant portion of the population has memory loss.

Good catch! It was fishy and strange indeed, but it was Alan Bean who said that. What I wonder how a professional astronaut seem to have no clue whats so ever what he is talking about.

I think they went around the inner belt (the belts are concentrated towards the equator) and went through the least dangerous parts of the outer belt.

​@@blended_manNVAB encompass entire globe. Afaik translunar injection trajectory goes closer to geomagnetic equator than the pole.

I'm pretty sure he means for each ship built.

Yea didnt they send rockets and astronauts a bunch of times beginning from 69 to 72?

Totally using words in a "dramatic" documentation to fit the modern idiotic conspiracy Hypothesis. Maybe want to add that the Orion spacecraft is doing a science based flight with instuments reading the radiation. So when adjustments have to be made or they are problems engineers can be made aware. Literally every space property and every Apollo mission made it through because with enough speed the radiation is not much different then a CT scan at your local Hospital. Obviously speed and planning the right flight trajectory plus protective lead help to make this possible.

Just what I was thinking

It gets WAY worse than that, Mr. Ray. What I love is the Flat Earthers who use what-ever snippets NASA may provide, and they can edit, to prove "SEE we've never gone into space, NASA said so" then reject the 50,000,000:1 (That's "Facts-VS-Retarded Conspiracy Theories"), facts provided by NASA as being.....what? Come-on, you know the word, that's right "Conspiracy" It's a conspiracy when it suit's them and it ain't when it don't =)

excellent point, conspiracy nutter

Because the technology is so old that it isn't compatable with mission control. It's the same reason why no one drives cars from the 50s anymore. I love all the idiot conspiracy shit going on here. Soooo funny

@@bonsaw57 you sir are a Moron.

They repaint it with lead based paint & it's good to go 😂

Because they can't just remake them because when they cancelled the program they got rid of all the tooling and shit to produce apollo missions. They absolutely COULD rebuild it, but why would you do that when there's 50+ years of technological development between then and now? You're talking at least tens of billions of dollars to get... 50+ year old tech. Why would you spend that when comparable amounts could be spent developing new tech?

See the Astronauts boots (for Real) and look at the print on the moon. Look it up!!! NOT THE SAME!!

@@VIKING33NY NASA is getting exposed more and more as each day goes by. Its down to the American people now!

They know that UFOs is real, and are going to be shocked every soon, when God's make his presence again to mankind.

You do know they had a suit to go over the suit they wore out to walk in. So diffrent boot tracks. Look that up

@@VIKING33NY I believe that moon landing was fake but when i looked up the actual boot (looks like a rainboot), it matched

Facts

Everyone: why don’t we just send appollo! NASA: apo never made it either in fact humans never went to space everything is a lie

People are so gullible they believe in every fake shit they tell them

He’s a flat mooner everybody! Cover your ears and eyes!

Nomore Mr Kubrick, nomore moon landing😂

God didn't design us to be up there so he put a firmament facts

@@Daylight7vs6 Stupid religious cultist is stupid.

G Heald their computers were no where near as complex as today's equipment, thus it was better at combating the challenges of radiation. There were 10 other Apollo missions before Apollo 11 they figured it out.

The radiation was low enough that the astronauts could tolerate it for a few days. That's what they did in 1969. Not so, for a trip to Mars. It's like, hmmm, surviving being in a microwave oven on high for 5 seconds, or for 5 hours.

medexamtoolsdotcom seriously this is the greatest bullshit I have come across.

Nate Nelson Hey are you road side engineering who doesn't know except bullshit.

G, This chick explains it perfectly. -> ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-bLtgS2_qxJk.html

On a landline!!!! 😂

@@diw1183 exactly...they only had short wave radio back then so calling them in space would've been impossible

Diggitydi Di LOOOOL

@@SpaceManWyo Idk what your actually saying here ....but everything was simple until these ppl started lying and flipping things inside out .....thats a fact and these are real conspiracies being played out .....all their lies are documented duh....or either truth redacted .....which is also a fact....nothing for me to prove at all ....in the court of law 8 would win hands down ....their words aren't credible at all

@@SpaceManWyo so once again even tho they o ly had short wave reviece an transmission how are they sending signals or service to a craft not 9nly thousands 9f miles away but not even in earth...lmao..u sound stupid as fuck

Governments lie

There have BEEN no giant leaps in rocket technology. It uses the same tech, big rockets, flimsy capsules, and steely eyed rocket men with balls of titanium.

People ain't smarter when you made this comment . You still believe tv lol. Facts are everywhere feel free to join us

@@briankelly5870 The commenter was being sarcastic. Stating the above mentioned didn't happen..

@@kristyperry6846 I know, I'm talking about the sheep

That is a misunderstanding. The radiation level in the VA belts is higher than the level above the belts.

@@zounds010 Well you're in a long waiting line of disappointment seeing these points are supported by research conducted by Princeton, Berkeley, UCLA, GSI, CERN, every single particle physicist on the planet, every solar physicist on the planet, NASA's heliophysics education activation team, and our international partners.

@@AwesomeBlackDude Your original post is unclear. It looks like you're claiming the radiation level above the VA belts is higher than the level in the belts, which is not correct. If you meant to say something else, perhaps you could clarify?

​@@zounds010 Well, answer this question, my friend: Why has there never been any deep spacewalks outside of Earth's orbit, past the Van Allen Belts? The International Space Station and Space Shuttle orbit within the Van Allen Belts, but below them. So, are you saying that the radiation is more suitable for humans once they pass the Van Allen Belts? The farthest distance humans have reached is when repairing the Hubble Space Telescope, at a distance of 358 miles. The SpaceX Dragon capsule surpassed that a couple of years later, traveling 360 miles. Additionally, an unmanned NASA Orion spacecraft reached approximately 364 miles during its launch in 2014.

@@AwesomeBlackDude Every Apollo mission that went to the moon, did spacewalks during the transfer from the moon back to Earth, i.e. outside the VA belts. Those were done to retrieve film from cameras in the Service Module.

too bad it isn't the truth, at least from Seb's disingenuous retitle of a NASA video he stole.

nowhere in the video did the person say that we cannot get pass the van allen belts, he just said it's a challenge that needs to be overcome before sending people through it, that doesn't mean that we don't know how to yet, it just means it is challenging. The moon landing acomplished this by using aluminum and polyethylene. Now this might come to a shock to you but they used these materials because the van allen belts are not belts of xrays, which is what lead protects against, these are belts of free protons and electrons captured from the solar wind. Aluminum blocks the protons and polyethylene blocks the electrons do to the hydrogen in it. Lead would actually emit xrays due to collisions with these particles, specifically electrons, this effect is known as Bremsstrahlung. In addition, the apollo spacecraft went through the least dangerous areas of the van allen belts. He even says just after the clip saying that electronics can be damaged that, "the Orion has shielding," obviously referring to the shielding that protects from the radiation of the van allen belts, which are charged particles (protons and electrons), NOT xrays.

Walter Schirra Jr. , Walter Cunningham, Donn F. Eisele, Frank Bowman, William A. Anders, James A. Lovell Jr., James A. McDivitt, Russell L. Schweickart, David R. Scott, Thomas Stafford, Eugene Cernan, John Young, Neil Armstrong, Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin, Micheal Collins, Charles Conrad Jr. , Alan L. Bean, Richard F. Gordon And that’s just Apollo 7-12 all of them went through the Van Allen belts

@@matthewbrown6130 hahahahaha

@D D At 3:16. "Radiation like this could harm the guidance systems, on-board computers or other electronics on Orion. Shielding will be put to the test as the vehicle cuts through the waves of radiation."

Iain Aitken, 3:37 the Engineer says, "We must solve these challenges before we can send people through this region of space (Van Allen Belts)." This is correct. No one has been to the moon.

@@maunster3414 Your conclusion does not follow from your premise.

@@maunster3414 he is talking about the new craft.

@@Jan_Strzelecki Explain this: How come one of the interviewed astronauts say that they did not reach out far enough to pass through the van Allen Belts? Once confronted about false answer as they actually did pass through, Alan Bean said promptly something like, well than we did pass the Belts whatever. It was fishy and strange indeed. What I wonder how a professional astronaut seem to have no clue whats so ever what he is talking about. All the involed astrounouts should have a singular matching answer on this topic, that is a rational conclusion that can not be denied.

How can you guys misunderstand everything?

Yes. He belongs to the newer generation of engineers, and they have less reason to lie.

No engineers have had any reason to lie. Except for paranoid bedwetters.

Unless the moon is actually in our atmosphere.

@@bluwng my gut is telling me you're a freaking idiot, but my mind is saying. Technically I don't know how far the atmosphere goes

dumb fuck. Back in the 50s and 60s soldiers were told to stand under atomic blasts to observe the effects of radiation.

Vince Wynne Kubrick wanted it to be so realistic they went to the moon to film.

Exactly 🤣👍

😂

They lost the funding (funding was 10 times higher at Apollo era) and public interest.

Bnslamb so they are just building up such a kind of super hero “movie trailer” just to get the money 💰. Makes sense.

Do you seriously think appropriations from the Congress are based on RU-vid videos? It's Trump that wants NASA to go back to the moon. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-OddG0QNroYE.html

And the plan is to go back to the Moon and stay, unlike Apollo they never planed to stay.

Here you can read about NASA appropriations. www.nasa.gov/offices/ocfo/appropriations

scientists are there to support the mainstream lies. wether they realise themselves or not.

I think Stanley Kubrick passed away.

No we did this several times without any issues. Buzz is still alive and kicking, punchy even.

They used three principles minimize radiation exposure. 1. They made the ship out of a reflective material. Since radiation behaves almost identically to light, reflective material can reflect some of the radiation. Thats why the command module is an aluminum color rather than being painted black and white. 2. This is a different type of radiation. There are two main types of radiation: radiation that acts like a wave and charged particles. Charged particles are much less harmful than radiation that acts like a wavelength. The harmful radiation at Hiroshima and Chernobyl was gamma radiation (wavelength). 3. They managed to steer around the heaviest doses. The radiation is not equal all the way around. Using math and data from satellites engineers were able to calculate a course that intercepted the moon while avoiding the hevest doses. Orion cannot do this, as the trajectories for interceping planets months or years in the future are very very fine, and they cannot expend the extra fuel required for going around the heaviest parts of the van allen belt

@@edisonbittencourt181 --- Rumor is he was REDRUM'd ;)

It was fake

NASA does what the current administration TELLS them to do. Trump says we should return to the Moon. NASA starts developing the ability to do that. If you don't like what NASA does, run for office.

Apollo program took many years. The fact that it only now that we are going back is because of a Trump directive and because of increased talk about going to Mars. Similar but new designs need testing and proving. With anything.

@@zdcyclops1lickley190 the point is that we never been to the moon...that is what he is trying to say.

@@rhinofren7707 well, what he says is dumb.

It's not that we couldn't rebuild the apollo craft and accompanying saturn v's, it's more why would we go through the process of starting that production back up when we could design something much better using today's technology. That stuff was definitely cutting edge back in the 60s, but not so much anymore. Not to mention they were effectively custom commissions in terms of production. Boeing and the other contractors had to set up spaces, supply lines, employees, etc to work on them, and even then they only built as many as we needed. And then when NASA stopped the moon landings and didn't need all those craft anymore, all the contractors stopped building them and reallocated the resources that went into building them into other projects or dropped them all together. So in order to build more apollo craft and saturn v's, we would basically be starting from square one from a production standpoint. At that stage, why not build something newer and better?

No they don't explain them as bubbles. Flat Earthers claim that they are bubbles. Gullible people believe them.

Really does. I've been convinced up until this day that we really went to the Moon & came safely back home again. Hmmm, did we...?

Gerard Rost Look into nixon’s landline live phone call and video stream with Apollo whilst they were on the moon

Dr Gunsmith the difference is now they have to do it on less then third of the budget

@@SpaceManWyo Hahahahahahahahahaha

And now, post Challenger and Columbia, they are making damn sure it's safe. Plus this piece was obviously made dramatic.

He is talking about the new space craft. You don't build a new car and not crash test it.

@@TheJakeVegas007 No, he's talking about the radiation, and shielding. Dumbass

Scarakus wtf is wrong with you? refer to a single technology from the 60ies which is still in use without a single change or improvement. name one. telephones? nope, huuuge improvements there. TV? nope, gigantic improvements Car savety features? seat belts and airbags, among other features like car design. Air planes? huuuge improvements there too. so why don’t they reproduce the saturn V rocket and apollo modules? well, for the same reason we dont build any of the above technologies; they are completely outdated. this is common sense... try harder, conspiraceeh nut

Weird, that's my nick name for every one of you inbreds that thinks we did it despite every single piece of evidence confirming it.

@@seigeengine Sticks and stones mate...For future reference, the next time you would like to insult someone, double check your spelling & sentence structure. I think you meant to say "didn't go"?

@@seigeengine And what evidence are you talking about, the doctored photographs, the fact that dust particles can't form on the moon yet all the photographs have dust all over the equipment, the fact that this very video they say "we have to figure... it out before we send people through this part of space" meaning the Van Allen belts, etc... You mean all that evidence? Okay, Ill look into it.

@@seigeengine clearly you are...a Moe Ron :)

You're dumber than a box of moon rocks.

ha ha

Think it this way we destroyed the very first model of a car because it would be outdated and too expensive to fix its the same with the moon lander we used

Pixel Life Simulator yeah but new cars were made to do a better job, yet we’ve still not been back to the moon since the 70s

Yes! Was just trying to find this as I remember hearing someone say that

@@pixellifesimulator4965 but the rocket was literally the blueprint so why would they destroy it when nasa says they still need to go to the moon

No. We just stopped going. When NASA switched to developing the Space Shuttle the private companies that built ALL of the hardware, STOPPED MAKING IT. The ONLY people on the planet that used this hardware was NASA, and they stopped buying. Currently the USA has no rocket capable of going past Low Earth Orbit. We catch rides on a Russian rocket in a Soyuz capsule to the ISS.

No, we just realized that spending billions of dollars and hundreds of lives to send a person instead of just sending unmanned missions that are easier cheaper and more efficient makes a shitton more sense.

It just didn't happen, the people above me are in denial for some reason.

Slip of mind my friend. LOL

We never went to the Moon.It's fucking lie.

They study the equipment and the belt. The craft will travel through a different section of the belts.

People believe this stuff because they can easily look up how things like that phone call were done. The phone line from Nixon's office was connected to the worldwide phone network. This phone call was routed to one of NASA's Deep Space Network stations, where all communications with the Apollo missions were done via radio. The phone audio was linked to this radio system, and sent to the moon. You should be familiar with this technique, because every radio station in the world uses it daily. The only difference is the distance the signal had to travel.

My favorite part was that you don't understand that a landline can be patched through...

@@tmrv2974 the lander didn’t gave a big enough power source, I’m sorry about your pea brain.

@@tmrv2974 please give me ONE logical reason as to why NASA and no other country has been back to the moon since.

@@tmrv2974 Explain how all evidence of what was supposed to be the greatest achievement of mankind was ‘accidentally deleted’? When has that EVER happened? They just intentionally destroyed the telemetry data to save tape when it should have been in a museum or something. It’s gone because it never existed and they can’t come up with a reasonable explanation for why it’s magically gone. They went up to lower earth orbit and came back down. That’s it.

They destroyed the stuff .. You will never know jajajajaja

It didn't

Just good ol American showmanship

NASA couldn’t even get the Hubble telescope right. Their stupid math was off. But, they earnestly want you believe they sent men to the moon.

NASA rake in billions a year from tax and for what? If they really went to the moon in the 60s then it should be so easy to do it again. So why haven’t they?

Wrong on both counts. That's not what's being said. It's called an ablative heat shield. Well understood and effective technology.

The Adventuring & Camping School, Thailand is he ? Hmmm

Every time a new complex system is built, you test the hell out of it, especially if you are NASA building a new space capsule. Space travel is hard, as you can see from the ongoing, regular failure of rockets and payloads. The Apollo program benefited from incredible resources, tremendous engineering talent, a clear focus, and pure good luck. The Soviet moon program did not fare so well. Given all the money and political pressures riding on NASA’s new SLS rocket & Orion capsule (not to mention the moral imperative of safeguarding the lives of the astronauts), it would be shocking-no, scandalous-if the agency did not perform extensive testing of its new hardware. And yes, that includes radiation testing, since we will be flying types of sensitive electronics that have never gone beyond the Van Allen belts before. Computer technology is a little different today than it was in 1969.

Wendy James.....uhhh, the moon is FAR past the Van Allen belts....far past them. As is Mars, where the Mars rover is supposedly running around (actually it is on Greenland, right here on earth.). Computer tech is a little different? LOL, my smart phone has a million times more tech than Apollo 11 .....neither of which have been to the moon.

Coleman Adamson see that's the question how are the johnny5 robots tech on mars working? Why not use that tech and shielding? It's working right they tell the johnny5's where to go and they go, so....didn't it go through the Van Allen belt radiation?

Just because the last bucket you made didn't crack in the sun, doesn't mean the next one will when you create a new manufacturing process. Apollo happened, but this is a NEW SPACE CRAFT & this video is to educate people as to the perils of space-travel because space is dangerous. It's not meant to confirm the psycho-bias of people who think we've never went to space, or the earth is flat.

Yes they did. NASA cheated, they thought about what they would need to take pictures, and built accordingly.

Obviously they were faked.

Yep, NASA made magic film that is impervious to heat, cold and radiation. Kodak was awesome in the 60's.@@zdcyclops1lickley190

They had three enormous parachutes that were opened at a certain altitude. Slowing it down to a relative crawl of 19 miles per hour.

Effe tive heat shields and the parachutes slowed them down to a relative crawl.

And it's Fiction lol 😆

@@BeatButler You wish. But have no ability to prove your claim

@@peterharoldjanakjr2078 this video is proof lol They didn't get through the belts with 60s tech. Anyone with common sense and any kind of education can figure out the moon landing was faked when you actually study the evedince. Sorry to burst your bubble. But you were lied to smh

....Or the PRESS CONFERENCE where the astronauts are LYING to reporters!! ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EsN3ojP4xpo.html Its *OBVIOUS* they are lying!!

specially because this video is about testing the orion spacecraft for radiation and the other video is about another spacecraft with no relation to this one?

lol

That technology was lost in a lava fire. they have to start over now

Yes, the great NASA lava fire of 1975. I keep forgetting about that.

If you lunar rover falls into a river of molten lava. Let it go man, cause it's gone.

Frank M NASA does not have the budget to build more Saturn v rockets like they had in the 60s.

People will say anything if their careers are threatened.

Only after he was threatened ,also if there survivable why did is NASA testing before they send humans through them ? You're a reste

You are making up facts

Even if he did. James never measured them. Nobody had yet.

Because it doesn't fit the lies they tell.

Daniel Buonsanto if you were not an American citizen during the Apollo program then you are not a part of We. Sucks to be a foreigner.

This is funny man.I get your humor.

It's not the electronics that are the problem. It is the people that have to survive. Wake Up

@@jjlepepe5875 This is old news. The tests all passed. The electronics were sufficiently shielded.

Riiiiiight, electronics back then were sh*t compared to today......sheeps will sheep

@@damiandmb2092 Here comes another genius. Old electronics were shit. No kidding... and? What? New electronics don't need shielding? From radiation you guys always say is so intense it would _"fry"_ everything in the spacecraft? 😋 Who's a sheep to somebody else's shitty conspiracy theory? 😆

Hi CW, hope that you are well. No, he was talking about the challenges facing the Orion spacecraft. He made that abundantly clear in the video. Take care.

@@TheWokeFlatEarthTruth Why wouldn’t these challenges apply to every other spacecraft?

@@Americansikkunt Hi CB, thank you for your comment. Hope that you are well. You asked " Why wouldn’t these challenges apply to every other spacecraft?". Basically they do but clearly the challenges presented to any spacecraft will depend on the nature of its intended mission. The Orion spacecraft and Artemis Program is different to any previous spacecraft and space program of recent decades in that it will involve crewed missions of long duration outside the Earths magnetosphere. Modern electronic systems and IC's are mole susceptible to radiation damage than the discrete components used in the Apollo missions for example.so rigorous testing is required before a crewed mission. Take care.

We are not still trying to figure it out. We figured it out in the 60s. We are trying to figure out how to protect computer systems that have a 1,000,000x more processes than the ones used on the Saturn V and thusly 1,000,000x more chances for radiation to cause data flips. The Van Allen Belt is not uniform, it is strongest in the center, but less radioactive near the edges. The astronauts even had dosimeters on their bodies and would regularly report the readings to ground. Ionizing radiation that is found in the Van Allen Belt is only dangerous to humans over a prolonged period of time. The astronauts would only spend one day in it before allowing their bodies to heal the damaged cells. And then passing through it for another day, before their bodies would then have forever to heal more damaged cells.

hehe good one :)

hehe good one :)

exactly Jason. they needed less technology to make it happen. soda can was just fine ;) :p

The Russians used pencils. Also, we used send soldiers in to ground zero area of nuclear tests after detonation. Maybe we are less willing to take the risk today. Now, we have air bags in our cars and kids can't ride bicycles with out a helmet.

Yeah, exactly. You'd likely survive passing through the Van Allen belt, but it's effects probably weren't studied closely, like Asbestos or Radium, until years later.

for how deluded conspiracy theorists can be when the video actually doesn't say what the retitle implies.

That the shielding on the old Apollo capsules was adequate for the duration of the missions is readily apparent as all of the astronauts who passed through the Van Allen belts survived - as did their cameras. What is not known for certain is if the shielding on the Orion capsule will protect the current generation of equipment which is far more susceptible to radiation and electromagnetic interference than the vacuum tubes used in the 1960s and early 70s. While all the computer simulations indicate that the Orion's shielding is up to the task, only real world, or in this case real space, testing will determine if Orion is ready for deployment for manned missions.

@@SteveGad The Apollo spacecraft passed through the thickest part of the belts in mere minutes.

@@11cookeaw14 The thinnest part of the outer belts.

Yes they did. They built a space craft that could complete the mission safely. That is the challenges he is speaking of.

wtf is wrong with you? refer to a single technology from the 60ies which is still in use without a single change or improvement. name one. telephones? nope, huuuge improvements there. TV? nope, gigantic improvements Car savety features? seat belts and airbags, among other features like car design. Air planes? huuuge improvements there too. so why don’t they reproduce the saturn V rocket and apollo modules? well, for the same reason we dont build any of the above technologies; they are completely outdated. this is common sense... try harder, conspiraceeh nut

@@GebSpez15215 exactly shit common sense that’s why they are mad and try and call us dumb. Liiike ok

@Low Spec Crap PC he’s not he’s right? Lmfao tell me how he’s wrong, people like you make me sad for this generation

@Low Spec Crap PC you saying “please stop being stupid” is quite literally saying he’s wrong

Yes that's not the big one biblical story's and truth that god exists but they make the masses lack of knowledge because they are wicked and the earth is giveth to the wicked in the all will no

@@Oregons right plane hit steel

*Freedom of speech * R have U 4gotten yah the Bible is one of the biggest lies

The moon landings have nothing to do with the Orion capsule. They are testing the Orion. It is not the same design, it will perform differently.

Or people like you are so uneducated and stupid that you make ridiculous conclusions without attempting to do any fact checking. Clearly NASA isn't actually admitting that we didn't go to the moon. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤡

No. It's you who has chosen to misinterpret his words. NASA has NEVER said they cannot get past that region. They can go. Fully exposing astronauts to potentially dangerous radiation. But they don't want to do that Untill they get the right amount of protection in the new modern equipment that is at higherr risk of damage than the equipment used in the Apollo program.

well that's not what this video is saying, but asking a conspiracy theorist to go past their biases is an effort in futility.

And the word you are groping for is "past" not "passed". Also incorrect in the title.

Sheep

1:36 and it's crew out of danger. 🙄

@@AwesomeBlackDude Danger from malfunctioning electronics, yes.

@@zounds010 He mention the crew twice.

@@AwesomeBlackDude Again. the crew's safety depends on the electronics (which he was responsible for) working well. The radiation levels in the belts are low enough that the pressure hull and heat shield of the spacecraft provide enough shielding, and no extra shielding is required.

@@AwesomeBlackDude Even if you weren't wrong about what's being said, you're effectively arguing "one guy said something that disagree with the consensus of experts, therefor everyone else is wrong." Addled.

no atmosphere to push against?

Thrust has never required a medium like air water or ground.

well spacecraft don't use jet engines, they use rockets (yes, there's a difference). A jet engine uses the air around it, while a rocket uses built in air for the combustion process.

Do you know what operation fishbowl is?

@@disturbedshaggy898 only what's available online. However if you are going to use it to validate these conspiracy theories I will kindly ask you to properly source and backup your claims.

Yes. "This region of space" being the high radiation regions of the Van Allen Belts. Which is nowhere close to where _Apollo_ flights have passed through on their way to the Moon.

Jan Strzelecki hahah u think they will fly through the highest radiation region just for fun? shutup ur so incapable of thinking on your own

@@Jan_Strzelecki lol, the van Alan belts start 1200 miles above earths surface, know your information before you comment ok.

@@TheGlitchMedia _hahah u think they will fly through the highest radiation region just for fun?_ No, they will fly through the high radiation region in order to adhere to an optimal Mars trajectory. I suppose you're going to expose your further ignorance now by asking why didn't _Apollo_ flights use this trajectory?..

@@benjialbert3317 _lol, the van Alan belts start 1200 miles above earths surface._ Earth's two main belts extend from an altitude of about 640 to 58,000 km. Know your information before you comment, okay?

you do know there were multiple apollo missions? lol

@@RedBullxMD ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-bdQHKf48Mfw.html Bullshit. It's all BULLSHIT. You've been lied to. We've all been lied to.

Not necessarily MUST go back but WHY go back? It’s an essential rock used for night and for guiding the sun as the sun and planets circle the fixed earth so nothing to do there or see.

Think he said 4K Fahrenheit

It didn't have to survive it as it never went through it. There is your answer.

AND.... magically all the cloth parachutes and their ropes survived those temperatures! hahaha

It is called an ablative heat shield. The surface of the heat shield melts, and is carried away by the atmosphere. This carries the heat away with it.

@@zdcyclops1lickley190 look up the materials used for that.... It makes no sense

Just taking the piss out of a quote if you take context out of anything it sounds weird and suspicious

@3:40 but you CAN'T be helped. Ur brain is fried.

You’re desperate to hold on to that moon landing fairytale. 🤣

@@Preus-by8ru a healthy distrust for NASA and government should not circumvent critical thinking, I could not care less what may or may not have taken place in the 60s and regardless, it has no impact on physics. I guess we’ll see what happens over the next two years.

problem is, they never even repeated that either LOL

@@SebMenard They repeated both moon missions and seat belt laws. The title of your video is misleading.

Lol sure they just kept their fingers crossed and "punched through it really fast"🤞 TWICE mind you going and coming back and the sweet technology from the 60s LUCKILY made hit ... OH I forgot and let's broadcast it LIVE for the all to see and🙏 pray the entire world doesn't watch our American Heroes🏅(which they absolutely are imo) DIE What you suggest happened is asinine and not even in the 60s would NASA had been so foolishly reckless . Open your mind think for yourself, look at the facts and just explore the possibility that the US Gov lied to its citizens and the world that day. Btw In the vid he said " ..we must solve the problem of passing through the radiation belt BEFORE WE SEND HUMANS THROUGH IT" he didn't say through it _again_ he said b4 we send them through it PERIOD

​@@Underbottom.SandydownClearly, it is you who is being misleading. We heard and understood exactly what the engineer said.

Lmao they you like being lied to lol

It is not a matter of figuring out how, Jules Verne wrote From the Earth to the Moon in 1865. It is a matter of design and testing, to prove the equipment is capable.

@@zdcyclops1lickley190 So when he wrote that book the technology was figured out? I've read books about flying cars, can that be made now? It IS about figuring it out, your book reference is odd. You'll have a tough time convincing me that in 2019 no other countries can mimic technology the U.S. possessed before we had the digital watch or pocket calculator. Especially when Russia was FAR ahead of us with this technology, and our own chief astronaut said we have no chance of making it to the moon by then. That astronaut did die in a freak "accident" after he went public (that he forewarned his wife would be an assassination by NASA) and replaced, you should Google Gus Grissom. We faked it to win the cold war, and it worked.

I heard his trousers were too big?

Mike Rusby Love It 😄 LOL

Exactly. I am so tired of the lies about this; They only spent a few hours in the belts and they bypassed the thickest parts. It would be great if people would watch the WHOLE FRICKING VIDEO!

Gallium arsenide products and modern vacuum tubes for Space should do the trick.

chris s ''The Apollo missions bypassed the inner van Allen belt, they spent very little time in the outer belt.'' fool, the moon is beyond both belts. Your explanation smells of ignorance.

So why don't we just use the old tech?

There is no old tech.. just special effects.

A place that also offers trillions in resources, new places to live, scientific discoveries about our universe and our world....

Totally different problems. We don't need to explore the oceans, and they can be explored with submersible. In some ways, Space is far easier to survive in, its just expensive getting up there and bumpy getting back. But much easier to build there.

The Internation Space Station is under Van Allen Belt, did you know?

Apollo went out to the east over Africa and the pacific ocean. It went right through the centre of the belt. It was only after it was pointed out about radiation in that route that they said they went over the north pole.

You didn't read the description before commenting did you? Palm to face

Josh Thomas, Yes you are correct. I didn't read the description before commenting. However, since the description is not obvious I believe most RU-vid viewers don't read them as a routine. I'll admit that the description does mitigate the sensational nature of the video's title. But without that hidden explanation the title as it stands suggests that NASA has never been able to pass through the Van Allen belt and supports the numerous RU-vid channels that pray on gullible viewers with claims that we never went to the moon. I apologize for wrongly assuming that this was such a Vidio. But I also believe a reasonable person can understand how I would have neglected to read the description and made my assumption. I could think of other wording for the title that would in itself be less confusing. Having expressed my mistake, I admit that I did. find the video interesting. Thank you for pointing out what I overlooked. I may not put my hand to my face, but I do respect good productive criticism and dialogue.

Hi, i completely agree. The title is misleading without the description, its clickbait.(if he titled properly he would have saved this time and his own time writing the description)To be honist I think it IS "one of them videos" but I'm trying to remain neutral for research purposes. It was my palm and face. I can't make you do that. Respect for your reply

No, not it wasn't. “We must SOLVE theses challenges before we SEND PEOPLE through this region of space”! 3:37

The title isnt necessarily misleading. Yes, he said THE SHIP could cut through the radiation. But he said PEOPLE could NOT. And that they would have to solve that issue BEFORE THEY COULD SEND PEOPLE through it. Watch again and listen to him say that around 3:30. So how did they get to the moon if they couldn't make it through the Van Allen Belts? Please explain

Because back then they didn't give a shit about safety. why worry about whether you'll give your astronauts cancer if there's only a 50% chance they're even gonna make it back.

It is possible that the older less advanced tech was actually safer from radiation than is modern tech which is miniaturised and very delicate. Humans did make it through the belts in the 60/70's and will do so again. SpaceX just tested their second stage in the Belt for 6 hours straight with the Falcon Heavy Tesla payload test. It takes a fraction of 6 hours to pass though the Van Allen Belts if you are actually on an injection trajectory.

He didn't say we can't get through it.

Magic !

godonlyknows13 couldn't be further from the truth. It is taken out of context. Other spaceships other than the ones from apollo program were not made for getting out of low earth orbit.

It's true that most manned spacecraft never intended of travelling past the belts... Which part couldnt be further from the truth? I'm asking for clarity reasons.