Тёмный

Something Weird Is Happening On The Moon.. 

The Space Race
Подписаться 355 тыс.
Просмотров 1 млн
50% 1

Опубликовано:

 

30 окт 2024

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 1,4 тыс.   
@ronhutcherson9845
@ronhutcherson9845 Год назад
If you’ve ever played Atari’s Lunar Lander video game you’ll have no doubt about how hard it is to land with nothing but thrusters and limited fuel.
@libradragon
@libradragon Год назад
Spot on reference! Only IF successful, lol. That was a fun challenge, liked that game.
@robymaru03
@robymaru03 Год назад
But apparently human did it 6 times in a row 50 years ago, the more we investigate the moon the more propestorous this moon landing tales get, I want to believe but the evidence is not helping at all.
@ronhutcherson9845
@ronhutcherson9845 Год назад
@@robymaru03 The first couple of levels are pretty easy, actually, but pretty soon you’re supposed to make pinpoint landings on cliff ledges with very little fuel. I never had enough money to get good at it but plenty of kids did.
@Levitiy
@Levitiy Год назад
@@robymaru03 Yes, because it wasn't remote control. The Lunar Modules had actual pilots which increases landing success by orders of magnitude.
@stainlesssteelfox1
@stainlesssteelfox1 Год назад
@@robymaru03 That's because the astronauts were handpicked combat or test pilots used to making split second decsions and staying calm under the most intense pressure who were then trained to the limits of human mental and physical fitness and intensively practiced this manouvre while still on Earth. Look up Lunar Landing Test Vehicle. I detect the unwashed stink of a moon landing hoaxer. Get over yourselves. It happened. The whole hoax idea was created by a delusional con artist named Bill Kaysing who had no scientific training and was a copy editor at Rocketdyne, wilfully misinterpreting some questions over the design of the F1 engine and building it up into a massive conspiracy to sell a book.
@user-ed1mj5zk6f
@user-ed1mj5zk6f Год назад
The Indian mission to the South Pole did exactly what proposed to do" One moon day", 14 days on Earth. They did the science they proposed and It was an excellent achievement, congratulations are, in order hear; felicitations! .
@pendarischneider
@pendarischneider Год назад
Love the content in general but would prefer you didn't repeat errors about the first manned lunar landing. The navigation system was not wrong. The module was heading for the rather generous planned landing target. The human pilot recognised the planned landing area was a boulder field. Armstrong did not take manual control at any stage, He could not. He changed the landing place by redirecting the flight computer... the first real "fly by wire" system. There were no "Luke Skywalker" moments just solid engineering and a well trained crew using it.
@Warren-ec8oo
@Warren-ec8oo Год назад
LMFAO
@systemicsystems703
@systemicsystems703 Год назад
It was fake!
@jbfiveash636
@jbfiveash636 Год назад
Thanks
@aliloucreations1817
@aliloucreations1817 Год назад
Totally agree ! Well said
@anonymike8280
@anonymike8280 Год назад
You're no fun.
@cliffordcurry2045
@cliffordcurry2045 Год назад
Picture was entirely misleading and I'm done with this BS.
@ZeeSA-no2zh
@ZeeSA-no2zh Год назад
Thank you,I will just stop before I even watch. Im glad I went through the comments first.
@dr.astro.hutchins
@dr.astro.hutchins Год назад
The photo was taken in 1968. Most people didn't have smart phones back then
@davidsheckler4450
@davidsheckler4450 Год назад
That won't happen until you can admit to yourself that space is Santa Claus for adults
@davidsheckler4450
@davidsheckler4450 Год назад
​@@dr.astro.hutchinsYou can't prove a "photo" you weren't there
@ronsasher
@ronsasher Год назад
Theses people think are being lied to I don't believe what they're telling the Americans lies to scare people
@stevenmitchell6347
@stevenmitchell6347 Год назад
If these gravity anomalies are known and mapped, it should be possible to account for them and make appropriate adjustments.
@christianmgbike6188
@christianmgbike6188 Год назад
On point bro
@malachiteofmethuselah9713
@malachiteofmethuselah9713 Год назад
Yes, but the average smart human does not even get past big "G," as a constant. Constants are not variables.
@mynde-fuchefoundation2254
@mynde-fuchefoundation2254 Год назад
You'd think.
@mynde-fuchefoundation2254
@mynde-fuchefoundation2254 Год назад
​@@malachiteofmethuselah9713but variables are a constant.
@malachiteofmethuselah9713
@malachiteofmethuselah9713 Год назад
@@mynde-fuchefoundation2254 Variables "Can," be a constant. If you wanna knit pick something. o.0
@richardnew1215
@richardnew1215 Год назад
I remember being taught in school that the uneven gravity in lunar orbit was from mass concentrations under the lunar surface--the remainders of cometary/meteorite bodies after the impact.
@oriraykai3610
@oriraykai3610 Год назад
A wild guess by know nothing doofuses.
@ts-900
@ts-900 Год назад
@@oriraykai3610 You are sooo correct -- the moon is obviously filled with marshmallow crème.
@omegaotaku1342
@omegaotaku1342 Год назад
@@ts-900 we've gone from thinking the moon is made of cheese to thinking it's made of marshmallow crème, in a day and age where some people still think the earth is flat
@michaelg.294
@michaelg.294 Год назад
@@omegaotaku1342 I've always wanted to ask a flat-earther if they thought the moon was also flat. Pretty sure I already know what they'd say.
@ts-900
@ts-900 Год назад
@@omegaotaku1342 GASP! You mean it's not flat? Well, as long as it's not a dodecahedron.
@bencoss7003
@bencoss7003 Год назад
It might be so hard to land on moon because it might be angry, you know it does have a dark side
@human_isomer
@human_isomer Год назад
Definitely! That's where all the pink Floyds live, and they can get a little aggressive every now and then.
@ZMacZ
@ZMacZ Год назад
6:30 Despite a 2.5 second delay, you can extrapolate for that time, and still be fairly accurate when steering remotely. You'd need a piloting ace though, that has a feel for the extrapolation. (That also means virtual training with the same equipment before the actual landing.) Or, you can ask a gamer that has always struggled with lag.
@strikerorwell9232
@strikerorwell9232 Год назад
A friend of mine played a multi-player game on the toughest level and was contacted by the US Navy?
@ZMacZ
@ZMacZ Год назад
@@strikerorwell9232 Can happen, if the game's stats are being recorded, and watched by naval Intelligence, while also regarding the game as a poll for expected results on a set of problems involving quick and/or rather exceedingly bright decision making skills. Basically, I'd make a game to recruit remote drone operators, which could then have a base of thousands of potentials. It's not a physical thing, it's a mental and hand/eye coordination thing, for which games are excellent proving grounds, barring cheating systems. (Cheats would be found out by not being able to produce the same results under overwatch.)
@Xhydraulics
@Xhydraulics Год назад
India's first landing attempt was a failure(chandrayan 2).But India's 2nd lunar lander landed on moon southpole recently and deployed a rover (chandrayan 3).It was not designed to survive the freezy lunar night due to tight budget. Anyway it just completed its 14 day mission.
@baddyforall2568
@baddyforall2568 Год назад
No man. First one was sent to orbit moon. Second one was sent to soft land but failed. 3rd one was successull
@Xhydraulics
@Xhydraulics Год назад
@@baddyforall2568 just read my comment carefully. I said first landing attempt. Not first mission
@4Everlast
@4Everlast Год назад
They promised hotels on the moon in 1969. = Every times, I mean EVERY time they promise they're going back, 15 wars "break out" and the space money is put into the war machine, for another election, another BS artist, and then suddenly we realize the US started the wars, as if there's a reason they can't/won't go to the moon. Ain't that interesting. Those India and China missions got ZERO main strem media space, I guess they can't fake it as well as the US did, and even they didn't do a great job mind you. You remember the blue screens? The zip lines in the ISS? The bubbles? I do.
@EbuCohen
@EbuCohen Год назад
Liar
@Xhydraulics
@Xhydraulics Год назад
@@EbuCohen who?
@JohnBerry-q1h
@JohnBerry-q1h Год назад
I went to hit the Like Button but my finger smashed into it with such velocity that it broke up before any useful data could be transmitted. 🌖💥
@ccc_the_painful_truth
@ccc_the_painful_truth Год назад
Messing up in 2023, yet no problem in 1969?
@razorfingers
@razorfingers Год назад
Eggs actly!
@daryl9799
@daryl9799 Год назад
Exactly horseshit he magically landed on his own intuition with seconds worth of fuel what a story lol
@martinnewtonholmes
@martinnewtonholmes Год назад
What`s your point ?
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
@@daryl9799 no one says that
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
So? You say it was “no problem” because you have no idea what you’re talking about. There are photos of the Apollo landing sites from lunar orbit and the surface.
@simondavis750
@simondavis750 Год назад
I love how we were basically just firing things in the direction of the moon and hoping it hit. And somebody said strap me in, I'm going up.
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
It’s a bit more precise than that, but there was speeches written in case of mission failure.
@mohammedrizwan9447
@mohammedrizwan9447 Год назад
India's Chandrayan 3 landed successfully on South pole of Lunar and manly become 1st Ever country to DO so... 🇮🇳 🇮🇳 🇮🇳
@Peggy-h7m
@Peggy-h7m Год назад
Ain't nobody got 2 the moon
@hcox1111
@hcox1111 Год назад
I seen the cartoon, real impressive .
@mohammedrizwan9447
@mohammedrizwan9447 Год назад
Like the US cartoon does, yes...🤔🤪
@hcox1111
@hcox1111 Год назад
US had slightly better cartoon but cartoon none the less.@@mohammedrizwan9447
@robertboeckmann1111
@robertboeckmann1111 Год назад
Thank you for this episode. Despite understanding that there is uneven gravity on the moon, I had not realized it was strong enough to affect navigation. It occurs to me that both automated and pilot controlled landing attempts would benefit from sensitive real time gravity sensors (not sure if this is currently possible at the scale to fit in a landing craft!
@Patrik6920
@Patrik6920 Год назад
...depends of the craft... modern sensors can be the size of 2 car batteries ..can probably be shrunk down...but since thers no real market or incentive doing so faast, the equippment are usually one of a kind custom builds... closest i belive u come to off the shelf sensors are a 19 inch rack module + external tube of .5 meters or so with a 5-6 inch diameter... ...but size isent really the issue anyway, its the weight... thers a high cost launch things into space... depending of launch rocket the cost varies alot bigger rocket - less cost/kg ... but then the rocket itself cost massive ...the proble is as said the weight not the size... cost in dollars from a small rocket costing 17k/launch the cost per kg is 41k/kg (unable launch more than small cube sattelites low orbit) to something costing 1 800 000 (almost 2 million dollar/launch) able to carry a space wehichle into space... 65k/kg payload but can carry tonnes... (also takes years to build and cant be reused) or the more resonable Quinguan (China) at 5 million dollars/launch 17.5k/kg cost ...for shooting up instument into orbit either in peaces(modules) or parts of and assemble in space smaller rochets r a viable alternative... but it would req assemble them in space
@lsmith6378
@lsmith6378 Год назад
India and Pakistan are nuclear countries and flying in space so why are they advertising for more money on TV.
@andymouse
@andymouse Год назад
I don't believe the moon can change gravity in a short period of time and to any extent that would bother any modern sensors today. We have magnetometers and accelerometers in kids toy drones that demonstrate the tech ! and that's the tech we know about !
@Patrik6920
@Patrik6920 Год назад
@@andymouse ...yes...ther are actually alot of accelerometers and magntometers that about the size of an integrated circuit... ..but when it comes to measuring precise gravity there isent rly many options... not yet... there are chip sized once but those r to inprecise atm...
@andymouse
@andymouse Год назад
My point is the gulf between a kids toy and what NASA have on hand is enormous and I'm sure the precision is too@@Patrik6920
@derrickdavis5279
@derrickdavis5279 Год назад
But USA landed on the moon in the 60's with no problem , but now with the technology we have , we have problems landing on it. (WOW)
@martinnewtonholmes
@martinnewtonholmes Год назад
Armstrong navigated to land
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
It wasn’t “no problem”. It was a very difficult thing to do and we basically got lucky.
@tekmepikcha6830
@tekmepikcha6830 Год назад
The moon not having even gravity around its perimeter, is the most awesome novel piece of information about anything space exploration, that I've learned this year! 🤣👏👏
@robymaru03
@robymaru03 Год назад
And Apollo mission going 6 times in the moon didn't even notice that somehow.
@stainlesssteelfox1
@stainlesssteelfox1 Год назад
@@robymaru03 Please give evidence of that assertion.
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
@@robymaru03 the Apollo missions didn’t have gravimetric sensors as far as I know. These days every modern military submarine has multiple for gravity mapping. It’s almost like technology improves over time or something…
@bakerfx4968
@bakerfx4968 Год назад
Your videos just keep getting better and better! Keep up the good work my dude!
@rustusandroid
@rustusandroid Год назад
Russia was first object in space, first man in space, first spacewalk, first spacestation, first lunar lander, first Venus lander, first Mars lander... plus many more. Trust me, they don't suck at space.
@curtisquick1582
@curtisquick1582 Год назад
Political stunts mostly. NASA did much better planned exploration programs. Most of the Russian firsts were nearly tragedies. They may have been slower, but NASA made it work for real.
@rustusandroid
@rustusandroid Год назад
@@curtisquick1582 Wow, moronic.
@BlueNETGaming
@BlueNETGaming Год назад
So back in the days we landed a moon lander with less tech then your average clock has but almost 50 years later we can’t replicate this??
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
Of course we can. China just did it. The US is doing it next year.
@JimmyRussell-c2s
@JimmyRussell-c2s 2 месяца назад
That's how Space X got rocket landing technology from business partners who Retired from NASA.
@pruthuchauhan2159
@pruthuchauhan2159 Год назад
FYI the Chandrayaan-3 mission was a succes. The lander Vikram touched down near the Lunar south pole and a Rover named "Pragyan" completed it's 14 Day mission.
@WDGaster-sh3md
@WDGaster-sh3md Год назад
This is one of the best video you made,really clear something out.Keep up and the public can see more about real space exploration.❤
@rogerjoseph2532
@rogerjoseph2532 Год назад
we never landed people on the moon yet, even today, nasa admits they don't have the technology to do it.
@warrengage9536
@warrengage9536 Год назад
With all due respect. The Apollo 11, as with all missions, was completely fly by wire. Neil did not fly the lander, all he could do was request the computer to seek another landing site by moving the joystick until he was satisfied with the landing site. The computer flew the lander.
@tonyhaslam186
@tonyhaslam186 Год назад
You apparently don’t understand what fly by wire is, and it isn’t the computer making decisions.
@sonnyburnett8725
@sonnyburnett8725 Год назад
@@tonyhaslam186Well, actually it is. The control stick sends impulses to a series’s of computers and they interpret those impulses and move the appropriate device, in this case the descent engine and RCS thrusters. More and more transport aircraft today are fly by wire.
@jeremydennis6988
@jeremydennis6988 Год назад
With all do respect but he still flew it if he wouldn't not of take over the so called computer it would have killed them. Landing in a rock fild
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
@@JennyJackson-zp7xu That is a lie based on a cherry picked piece of footage. He said we never went back, not that we didn’t go. Which is entirely true, after the last Apollo mission humans haven’t gone back. Until next year anyway.
@ghost307
@ghost307 Год назад
"Something weird is happening on the moon" sounds like the whole premise of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
@SegoMan
@SegoMan Год назад
I don't think so Dave.........
@Joseph_Omega
@Joseph_Omega Год назад
This really explains it! Makes _PERFECT_ sense why the *Moon,* though MUCH closer and accessible than *Mars,* has had so many failures. Maybe modern AI can finally now stand in for real-time human intelligence.
@SousukeAizen421
@SousukeAizen421 Год назад
Mars is still harder to reach than the moon, the amount of fuel, logistic, and calculation is like many times greater than the moon landing , US doesnt not even try to land on the moon anymore seeing that there's no new groundbreaking discovery to befound in there, they have 2 actice rovers and a small helicopter on there already, same with China
@ts-900
@ts-900 Год назад
My theory is that we are using standard and metric measurements, but the moon uses lunar units.🌙🧀
@2-4ever
@2-4ever Год назад
I'm still doubtful any Apolo mission ever landed on the moon. After watching this, even more doubtful.
@martinnewtonholmes
@martinnewtonholmes Год назад
The Government wouldn`t lie to you
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
If you’re doubtful it’s probably because you don’t know what you’re talking about, just like the guy that made the video. The fact that the Soviets didn’t call bullshit is a big clue. The fact that universities and civilians all over the world followed the missions by radio and telescope are another. The pictures of the landing sites taken by the LRO are another…
@2-4ever
@2-4ever 11 месяцев назад
@@UpperDarbyDetailing it was faked. The fact that the technology to go to the moon was lost is a big clue. It's you that is confused. Someday, you will be on the stupid side of history, if not already. Oh, BTW, saying the mission was followed by radio is literally the dumbest $hit ever. Any credibility you had just went limp. And guess what buddy, the Russians did call bull$hit, and still do. Did you know that since 2010 there has only been 8 attempts to land on the moon? 4 of these were unsuccessful. Here's the kick in the nuts boy, none of these missions were too return to earth. Why? Because they can't.
@donaldbullock9718
@donaldbullock9718 Год назад
THE GOVERNMENT WOULD NEVER TELL THE PEOPLE WHAT THE GOVERNMENT IS REALLY DOING
@maxsmith695
@maxsmith695 Год назад
bingo
@johnmiskimins4104
@johnmiskimins4104 Год назад
10:20 $$$$$$$
@maxsmith695
@maxsmith695 Год назад
@@johnmiskimins4104 would you step into a rocket headed to the moon if the experts told you the risk of TMF - Total Mission Failure - was 98%. Seems NASA found 3 who would and after 6 missions , no failures. How nice.
@jessicalouise1580
@jessicalouise1580 Год назад
That's exactly right. They think we're stupid. Little do they know. People are beginning to see the world for what it is.... everything is being exposed and there's nothing any of the world's governments can do about it.... I wait for the day for total public anarchy!!!! Our general population standing up to these asshats giving them a taste of their own medicine 😂
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
@@maxsmith695 really, 98%? I have a very low expectation of that number being correct, since you can’t even get the number of astronauts correct.
@Comicsluvr
@Comicsluvr Год назад
Aliens. I don't want to say it's aliens...but it's aliens.
@cosmicHalArizona
@cosmicHalArizona Год назад
What's the criteria for assigning the poles i.e. southpole/ northpole?
@and4all706
@and4all706 Год назад
How did they get through the Van Allen Radiation Belt?
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
First, there’s two belts, at the time there was three. The Van Allen Belts are arranged in a doughnut shape, so they just plotted a route that would take them through as quickly as possible. They also used radiation shielding, and the belts simply aren’t that dangerous. It’d be bad to STAY there, but a few hours is essentially nothing.
@infernoplexx9562
@infernoplexx9562 Год назад
Very informative video , good job
@therealzilch
@therealzilch Год назад
Oh come on. Let's just acknowledge that it's hard to land on the Moon and luck plays a role, as usual.
@lancasterhypnotherapy
@lancasterhypnotherapy Год назад
Incorrect- The 9 NASA Ranger missions were never designed to "soft land on the Moon". Rangers were designed to remain fully functional with cameras returning photos until impact
@DavidHauka
@DavidHauka Год назад
Exactly right! Thanks for letting folks know!
@sunayocarissime5309
@sunayocarissime5309 Год назад
From what my uncle told me, whom I might add was an Air Force veteran, he said landing on the moon is NOT as easy you think. The electro magnetic field around the moon makes logistics insane. "I think it was designed that way but that's a whole different beast," he said and its better NOT to ask. One thing though the Apollo missions don't get the credit they deserve because those were a logistical nightmare. Props to the original Apollo missions, their crews were basically told, "we need you to land on a the head of a pin blindfolded and navigating with your tongue to get it the Lunar lander to land on a spec of dust!" It's not as easy as it sounds. RIP Uncle Miquel, I miss your stories tio.
@maxsmith695
@maxsmith695 Год назад
The Apollo mission was faked. Nixon was delusional, until he realized his stupidity resulted in him getting into a big jam.
@robertf3479
@robertf3479 Год назад
Just want to note here that the RANGER missions launched by NASA were all intended to be impactors, none were to soft land.
@batmantherooster
@batmantherooster Год назад
Very good video thanks 🙏 for your long hour’s putting this video together!!!❤❤❤❤❤
@alanb3267
@alanb3267 Год назад
Considering the recent attempts to land vessels on the moon, resulting in failures, kind of brings light the ever wondering conspiracy. Did we really land on the moon back in the 60s. You would think that 60 years later with the technology improvements it would be second nature for the aerospace industry.
@Peggy-h7m
@Peggy-h7m Год назад
N do u really think there's a rover on mars?😂
@joerodriguez3002
@joerodriguez3002 Год назад
No,,we didn't. When in doubt there is no doubt. Overwhelming evidence shows that we didn't.
@Stevesbe
@Stevesbe Год назад
You think the government would lie to us??? I can't believe that ..... is the next booster shot available yet
@timothyhine2258
@timothyhine2258 Год назад
Seems to be easier to land on Mars.
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
@@joerodriguez3002 Overwhelming evidence shows we did. For one thing, if we didn’t the Soviets would have called bullshit. For another the flight was followed by universities and civilians all over the globe.
@audegottoeaudegottoe363
@audegottoeaudegottoe363 Год назад
Have a wonderful October ! N à great New Year's ! / / thanks
@bertilandersson6606
@bertilandersson6606 Год назад
Amazing video, you gained a subscriber! Just wondering, isnt electromagnetic storms an issue as well? Maybe it makes sense to land on the moon when the moon is at certain position relative to the sun and earth in order to midgate gravitational and electromagnetic effects.
@BurgertAPotgieter
@BurgertAPotgieter Год назад
Apparently there is no Magnetic field present on the moon and then again, nothing has been proven what the moon exists of. NASA the biggest liars in the Universe just touching the levels of the Democrats.
@RetroGamesCollector
@RetroGamesCollector Год назад
The Russians were first at everything *but* putting the first person on the moon. They won the space race hands down in my book, they did all the important stuff first.
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
Also the first to murder an astronaut by sending him up in a deeply flawed vessel. America has a much better safety record for a reason.
@connecticutaggie
@connecticutaggie Год назад
Spacecraft are (mostly) open space surrounded by a thin shell. They are much lighter than rock so it is not a buried spacecraft. It seems it would more likely be a metallic meteor.
@gantzthegreat8998
@gantzthegreat8998 Год назад
it was a rock people ship, all rock
@connecticutaggie
@connecticutaggie Год назад
@@gantzthegreat8998 LOL, even if they were rock people, they would need a way to move around and moving through solids is really not practical so the interior would need to be mostly gas or liquid which would also be less dense than rock. I guess rather than rock, they could be heavy metal, maybe that could work. 😄
@gantzthegreat8998
@gantzthegreat8998 Год назад
or they were liquid meal terminators from the future@@connecticutaggie
@raytaylor3077
@raytaylor3077 Год назад
just maybe nobody has ever gone to the moon, much less walked on it
@travislangevin6319
@travislangevin6319 Год назад
Maybe someone can explain to me how human astronauts got through the Van Allen radiation belt that is in between Earth and the moon without dying
@YDDES
@YDDES Год назад
Travislangevin319. Yes, the van Allen belts are not nearly so dangerous to just pass in a few hours, that the silly conspirasists say.
@riog8082
@riog8082 Год назад
Travis you are 💯. Especially since nasa says they havent built a craft yet capable of deflecting the radiation to protect humans. Look it up yourself. It’s nasa’s own video on youtube. The van allen belts Arranged like two nested donuts, the inner belt is mainly energetic protons, while the outer belts contain both protons and electrons. These belts have long been known as 'bad news' for satellites and astronauts, with potentially deadly consequences if you spend too much time within them. Now does that sound dangerous to you? People who say otherwise are trying to keep up with the lies. And in case you get someone that says, Astronauts are safe because they were moved quickly thru the belts, here is an even greater risk. What poses a greater risk, then? The galactic cosmic rays represent a greater risk because we know we can’t protect against them. Solar radiation storms also pose a more challenging risk because these are not easily predicted and they affect all of geospace with increasing severity, the further one is from the protective shield of the Earth’s magnetosphere. Here’s what Piers Jiggens, an engineer from the European Space Agency’s Space Environment and Effects section, and a member of ESA’s Heliophysics Working Group, based at ESA’s technical heart ESTEC in the Netherlands. Originally from the UK, Piers graduated in aeronautics and earned a PhD in astronautics specialising in solar particle radiation and spacecraft design related to the threat posed from solar flares and solar eruptions. He says as stated above “We can’t protect”
@peterclarke3020
@peterclarke3020 Год назад
The answer is - rather quickly…
@mark-l1w7k
@mark-l1w7k Год назад
Astronauts have never traveled thru the Van Allen radiation belt.
@mark-l1w7k
@mark-l1w7k Год назад
If facts bear something out weather or not it may be a conspiracy really does not matter.@@YDDES
@curtisquick1582
@curtisquick1582 Год назад
None of the Ranger lunar probes were intended to soft-land on the Moon. They were only meant to fly to the Moon taking ever better images before impact. The Surveyor probes were intended to be soft landers and almost all were successful years before Apollo 11. It may be true that the Russians soft-landed on the Moon first, but they had fewer probes that collected much less science. The Ranger and Surveyor programs succeeded in gathering a lot of critical science that made the Apollo missions so much more successful. The Russians had no such well-planned scientific programs. They were one-off political stunts. This is why Russian probes still crash to this day. They are more political stunts to get attention than they are well-planned science.
@Anuchan
@Anuchan Год назад
The LRO has been orbiting since 2009 at a height of 50 km. It calculated an orbit that took the gravity anomalies into effect.
@CarlosSilva-td3nn
@CarlosSilva-td3nn 4 месяца назад
Such great videos, informative yet, entretaining! Many thanks from Sao Paulo, Brazil.
@CoryPavicich
@CoryPavicich Год назад
This was a really informative and well-produced RU-vid documentary! Subscribed! Thank you!
@MikeMason-d9s
@MikeMason-d9s Год назад
Megatron is hiding there
@kend6693
@kend6693 Год назад
Learning by failing? Well everyone except Dr. Evil
@erictaylor5462
@erictaylor5462 Год назад
Landing on the moon is really very hard. Lots of things have to work perfectly to make it happen. If something vital breaks, or someone made a small math error, rather than a soft landing, you have a crash. It's damn lucky we didn't lose an Apollo mission. Even then, one of the missions that intended to land failed.
@biser1901
@biser1901 Год назад
Being able to land on something that is not a solid body that is apparently clearly visible against the blue sky as a transparent semi-self-luminous cold plasma with a silvery white light quite unlike the warm yellow Sun, and is by no means seen as solid a rock during the day against the background of the blue sky is not only impossible and absurd, but also an infinitely insane and childish belief for ignorant people with perverted programmed thinking, as well also for ideological people having a huge illusion of real knowledge. Only NASA and modern astronomy claim and defend the cause that the Moon is a solid, spherical, Earth-like abode that man has actually flown to and stepped on. Only they claim that the Moon is a non-luminous planetoid that receives and reflects all its light from the Sun. The reality, however, is that the Moon is apparently not a solid body, it is certainly round, but not spherical, and it is by no means an Earth-like planetoid that humans could step on. The moon cannot physically be both a spherical body and a reflector of the Sun's light at the same time. In order to reflect the light, the reflectors must inevitably be flat or concave like a car headlight, gathering in focus the light rays from any angle of incidence, but if the surface of a given reflector is convex, then any incident ray will be reflected in a straight line with the radius perpendicular to the surface, resulting in scattering of light. In fact, the Moon is proven to be largely transparent and completely self-illuminated, glowing with its unique silver-white light. In many cases the moon is observed half-illuminated from early at night to late in the day with the same angle of illumination, and in the unillumined part, where it should be a dark mass of rock, we see the blue sky and stars in the early morning without changing the angle of the lunate part of the Moon, which part is supposed to be reflected by the Sun until late in the day at the same fixed and unchanging angle of the lunate part of the Moon! When the waxing or waning Moon is visible during the day, it is possible to see the blue sky right through the Moon. And on a clear night, during waxing and waning, it is sometimes even possible to see stars and "planets" directly across the surface of the Moon! Throughout its history, the Royal Astronomical Society has documented many such cases that do not obey the Heliocentric model. The light of the Sun is golden, warm, drying, protective and antiseptic, while the light of the Moon is silvery, cool and damp, putrid and septic. The sun's rays reduce the burning of the pyre, and the moon's rays increase the burning. Vegetable and animal substances exposed to sunlight quickly dry up, shrink, coagulate and lose their tendency to putrefy and putrefy: grapes and other fruits become hard, partially candied and preserved, such as raisins, dates and prunes, animal flesh coagulates , loses its volatile gaseous components, becomes hard, dry and difficult to putrefy. When exposed to moonlight, however, plant and animal matter tends to show symptoms of decay and decay. This proves that Sunlight and Moonlight are distinct, unique and opposite, as they are in the geocentric flat model. A thermometer exposed to direct sunlight will read a higher temperature than another thermometer placed in the shade. But exposed entirely to direct moonlight, a thermometer will read a lower temperature than one placed in the shadow of the moon. That is, in the shadow of the Moon, the temperature of the thermometer is higher than the temperature of the thermometer exposed to direct Moonlight. If Sunlight is concentrated, through large lenses, then at the focal point it creates considerable heat, while Moonlight similarly collected does not create heat. In the Lancet Medical Journal of March 14, 1856, several experiments were detailed which proved that the rays of the moon, when concentrated, could actually lower the temperature of a thermometer by more than eight degrees. Thus Sunlight and Moonlight undoubtedly have quite different properties. This single and irrefutable fact alone, which is supported by experiment, destroys and demolishes the Heliocentric theory, and this elementary experiment can be done by every single person on earth without requiring or needing any education or knowledge of physics or other sciences. Many people believe that the ability of modern astronomy to accurately predict solar and lunar eclipses is a result and unequivocal proof of the heliocentric theory of the universe. The fact is, however, that eclipses were accurately predicted by various cultures around the world for thousands of years before the "heliocentric ball-Earth" even flashed in Copernicus' imagination. Ptolemy in the First Century accurately predicted eclipses, based on the hexagonal annual pattern of the flat, fixed Earth with the same precision as today. As early as 600 BC Thales accurately predicted an eclipse that ended the war between the Medes and Lydians. Eclipses occur accurately regularly in 18-year cycles, so regardless of geocentric or heliocentric, flat or spherical earth cosmologies, eclipses can be accurately calculated regardless of such factors.
@ccc_the_painful_truth
@ccc_the_painful_truth Год назад
So "lucky" 🤣
@Davidbirdman101
@Davidbirdman101 Год назад
Neil Armstrong was a strange man. I don't mean that in a negative way, but there was something about the guy that I always found.....mysterious. After he came back from the moon he went on some bizzare quests, looking for something. But I don't want to come across as thinking he was a bad guy. I think he was a real hero.
@hcox1111
@hcox1111 Год назад
He lived right down the road from me in Lebanon, Ohio.
@Based_Is_Best
@Based_Is_Best Год назад
Why would it say there were two replies, but I could only see one?
@wrodrigues08
@wrodrigues08 Год назад
He was hiding a terrible secret…there was no moon landing!
@davidsheckler4450
@davidsheckler4450 Год назад
Yes we have a very serious problem...it's the fact that there's still supposedly fully grown functioning adults that think the Universal Studios Orlando footage was a moon "landing" 😂🤣😅🤦
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
Only idiots think there wasn’t a landing. Explain all of the people that listened to the mission on HAM radios? The Soviets agreeing that we did it? All of the observations that watched it by telescope? The thousands of images, including recent ones of the landing site?
@MikeBurns-bi5xj
@MikeBurns-bi5xj Год назад
How come the USA landed on the moon 24 times without any problems
@jamesgeorge4874
@jamesgeorge4874 Год назад
The US is pretty awesome at space stuff.
@esmenhamaire6398
@esmenhamaire6398 Год назад
experience learnt from initial failures
@curtisquick1582
@curtisquick1582 Год назад
Actually, the US landed without problems only 11 times on the Moon. 5 robotic Surveyor probes and 6 Apollo crews safely soft-landed on the Moon. Still pretty awesome, however.
@DRU1421
@DRU1421 Год назад
oh you didnt hear? "they would go back to the moon in a nanosecond but they lost that technology and its a painful process to build it back again".so there just going to mars instead.
@dcaranta3931
@dcaranta3931 Год назад
We never went to the moon...
@chammockutube
@chammockutube Год назад
Wouldn’t the sky-crane “portion” of a lunar landing be very similar to its use on Mars or perhaps easier as I think the moon’s gravity is about 44%-ish of Mars gravity?
@JBulsa
@JBulsa Год назад
That was a chunk from the Earth 4,600 years ago. Moon south pole. Not space 4 trillion years ago. Lumpy gravity on the Moon.
@johnc007
@johnc007 Год назад
So NASA wants Space X to land their bullet shaped starship on the moon vertically despite the moon having varying gravity, no atmosphere and an uneven surface? Sounds like a difficult task!
@robinkelly1770
@robinkelly1770 Год назад
It is run by musk so an impoosible task...
@curtisquick1582
@curtisquick1582 Год назад
After landing hundreds or large Falcon boosters on Earth, the Moon, with its lower gravity, will be so much easier for SpaceX. And besides, the computer on board is much more capable than humans at landing.
@johnc007
@johnc007 Год назад
@@curtisquick1582 It’s nothing like landing on Earth. There’s no atmosphere so you can’t use wing flaps to correct the orientation of the upper section. You would need retro thrusters. The surface of the moon is not flat. The video even mentions how hard landing the reusable rockets on earth is. So on the moon it’s a lot more difficult.
@pmeyer2019
@pmeyer2019 Год назад
@@robinkelly1770 how so? He’s succeed at everything he’s done including perfecting reusable rockets. Just you hate him because you’re a liberal. Lol
@biser1901
@biser1901 Год назад
Being able to land on something that is not a solid body that is apparently clearly visible against the blue sky as a transparent semi-self-luminous cold plasma with a silvery white light quite unlike the warm yellow Sun, and is by no means seen as solid a rock during the day against the background of the blue sky is not only impossible and absurd, but also an infinitely insane and childish belief for ignorant people with perverted programmed thinking, as well also for ideological people having a huge illusion of real knowledge. Only NASA and modern astronomy claim and defend the cause that the Moon is a solid, spherical, Earth-like abode that man has actually flown to and stepped on. Only they claim that the Moon is a non-luminous planetoid that receives and reflects all its light from the Sun. The reality, however, is that the Moon is apparently not a solid body, it is certainly round, but not spherical, and it is by no means an Earth-like planetoid that humans could step on. The moon cannot physically be both a spherical body and a reflector of the Sun's light at the same time. In order to reflect the light, the reflectors must inevitably be flat or concave like a car headlight, gathering in focus the light rays from any angle of incidence, but if the surface of a given reflector is convex, then any incident ray will be reflected in a straight line with the radius perpendicular to the surface, resulting in scattering of light. In fact, the Moon is proven to be largely transparent and completely self-illuminated, glowing with its unique silver-white light. In many cases the moon is observed half-illuminated from early at night to late in the day with the same angle of illumination, and in the unillumined part, where it should be a dark mass of rock, we see the blue sky and stars in the early morning without changing the angle of the lunate part of the Moon, which part is supposed to be reflected by the Sun until late in the day at the same fixed and unchanging angle of the lunate part of the Moon! When the waxing or waning Moon is visible during the day, it is possible to see the blue sky right through the Moon. And on a clear night, during waxing and waning, it is sometimes even possible to see stars and "planets" directly across the surface of the Moon! Throughout its history, the Royal Astronomical Society has documented many such cases that do not obey the Heliocentric model. The light of the Sun is golden, warm, drying, protective and antiseptic, while the light of the Moon is silvery, cool and damp, putrid and septic. The sun's rays reduce the burning of the pyre, and the moon's rays increase the burning. Vegetable and animal substances exposed to sunlight quickly dry up, shrink, coagulate and lose their tendency to putrefy and putrefy: grapes and other fruits become hard, partially candied and preserved, such as raisins, dates and prunes, animal flesh coagulates , loses its volatile gaseous components, becomes hard, dry and difficult to putrefy. When exposed to moonlight, however, plant and animal matter tends to show symptoms of decay and decay. This proves that Sunlight and Moonlight are distinct, unique and opposite, as they are in the geocentric flat model. A thermometer exposed to direct sunlight will read a higher temperature than another thermometer placed in the shade. But exposed entirely to direct moonlight, a thermometer will read a lower temperature than one placed in the shadow of the moon. That is, in the shadow of the Moon, the temperature of the thermometer is higher than the temperature of the thermometer exposed to direct Moonlight. If Sunlight is concentrated, through large lenses, then at the focal point it creates considerable heat, while Moonlight similarly collected does not create heat. In the Lancet Medical Journal of March 14, 1856, several experiments were detailed which proved that the rays of the moon, when concentrated, could actually lower the temperature of a thermometer by more than eight degrees. Thus Sunlight and Moonlight undoubtedly have quite different properties. This single and irrefutable fact alone, which is supported by experiment, destroys and demolishes the Heliocentric theory, and this elementary experiment can be done by every single person on earth without requiring or needing any education or knowledge of physics or other sciences. Many people believe that the ability of modern astronomy to accurately predict solar and lunar eclipses is a result and unequivocal proof of the heliocentric theory of the universe. The fact is, however, that eclipses were accurately predicted by various cultures around the world for thousands of years before the "heliocentric ball-Earth" even flashed in Copernicus' imagination. Ptolemy in the First Century accurately predicted eclipses, based on the hexagonal annual pattern of the flat, fixed Earth with the same precision as today. As early as 600 BC Thales accurately predicted an eclipse that ended the war between the Medes and Lydians. Eclipses occur accurately regularly in 18-year cycles, so regardless of geocentric or heliocentric, flat or spherical earth cosmologies, eclipses can be accurately calculated regardless of such factors.
@mmwaashumslowww7167
@mmwaashumslowww7167 Год назад
There is also a gravitational anomaly at the earth's South Pole where they know about a strange mass below Antarctica. Rather odd, don't you think?
@DesertSessions93
@DesertSessions93 Год назад
I wonder if other planets have such anomaly...
@dr.OgataSerizawa
@dr.OgataSerizawa Год назад
@@DesertSessions93 Study Uranus closely…..you’ll find it chock-full of anomalies.
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
Yea, it’s called “Antarctica”.
@timothystockman7533
@timothystockman7533 Год назад
This IS rocket science! As I understand it, Armstrong took PARTIAL control during the landing. The only time the descent engine was fired under full manual control was a course correction burn during Apollo 13.
@AZA6819
@AZA6819 Год назад
Good content. So nice to hear stuff that doesn't sound like everyone's else. 🎉
@randywarren7101
@randywarren7101 Год назад
Wrong on the Ranger missions. They weren't designed to soft land on the moon. Ranger was designed to take pictures from about 1000 miles out until just before crashing into the Moon. Surveyor was the first design by NASA to soft land on the Moon. The third set of robotic probes was Lunar Orbiter and they were sent into orbit around the Moon to take pictures to make the first 3 dimensional maps of the Moon as a guide for the Apollo astronauts!
@harashylander1321
@harashylander1321 Год назад
India is constructing Willa’s on the moon 👍👍👍🌹
@joseeduardobolisfortes
@joseeduardobolisfortes Год назад
Perhaps there is a group of local bureaucrats deciding who can or not get the Gray Card...
@kennethpole2439
@kennethpole2439 Год назад
"... it could, in theory, could be just about anything ..." 😂
@randywilliams9531
@randywilliams9531 Год назад
Magnetic variables could be tracked by engineers and recorded. Maybe watch the path for a landing craft say for about 6 months to register fluctuations and gain insight into what they need to do
@rentechpad
@rentechpad Год назад
Given that we do not exactly know how the moon was formed but if it was formed from a collision between earth and another large body, as the left overs caught in earths gravity came together to create the moon its also possible that debris of different densities settled in under the effect of earths gravity to form a moon that did not arrange the material available in a pattern of even distribution.
@britz3864
@britz3864 Год назад
Thank you for such a concise and comprehensive explanation. It makes it so much easier to understand and retain information. Thumbs up and subscribe.
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
This isn’t very good information, I’d recommend someone better. Everyday astronaut has good info
@Gungfu-mx1my
@Gungfu-mx1my Год назад
They eliminated Kenny because they didn't want to admit they couldn't land on the moon and come back, exposing Majestic Twelve Alien recovered Technology
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
Good impression of an idiot
@meatgoat4084
@meatgoat4084 Год назад
"We know that India is home to many of the best-educated and smartest engineers on the planet." It goes without saying that the best-educated and smartest engineers from every nation form the set of the best-educated and smartest engineers on the planet. But you seem to be implying that Indian engineers are extraordinary in some regard. Who is "we" and how do we know this?
@javiervasquez29
@javiervasquez29 Год назад
America has the best.
@ArupRatanMitra
@ArupRatanMitra Год назад
Nothing extraordinary about Indian engeniers they do good in certain fields but suck at others mainly because of a lack of capital I believe
@davidvomlehn4495
@davidvomlehn4495 Год назад
I will not say the have *the* best, but note that India has centuries of matematical and engineering traditions. I'm jealous of ISRO's success and welcome them into the club with open arms. Now it gets *really* fun! (Fingers crossed for iSpace). And, please spend little time debating who's the best and more time on being the best.
@meatgoat4084
@meatgoat4084 Год назад
@@davidvomlehn4495 What debate? It's a forgone conclusion according to this streamer. "We know" it to be true! I've worked with engineers from many nations for over 30 years including many from India and I never knew this fact. I have learned something new today. I am now in the "we" club!
@zeltron-qk2iu
@zeltron-qk2iu Год назад
He was proving the point dimwit That even with best of all team, tech & brains it's still hard Low iq
@ronnyb5890
@ronnyb5890 Год назад
there's also the fact that these new landings are being done on the other side of the moon, thus out of the LOS (line of sight) where the earth cant give direct instructions anymore, the only way a landing could be more feasable, is to give command for landing the craft over to AI, that way it can automatically changes trajectory and velocity accordingly
@bigboss-tl2xr
@bigboss-tl2xr Год назад
Or put up a cubesat to be a relay.
@ArndBrugman
@ArndBrugman Год назад
Please leave out political statements in your videos, you're better than mainstream media. Thx.
@swarnamohanty3121
@swarnamohanty3121 Год назад
India 's chandrayan landed on lunar south pole .
@radarw64
@radarw64 Год назад
No matter how you try to explain this chunk of stuff under the South Pole, it may explain why the Moon stays in an unusual orbit.
@bigboss-tl2xr
@bigboss-tl2xr Год назад
Huh? What is unusual about it?
@radarw64
@radarw64 Год назад
@@bigboss-tl2xr i think one side always faces the Earth
@bigboss-tl2xr
@bigboss-tl2xr Год назад
Yeah, I just don't understand what is "unusual" about that. Many moons are tidally locked. 🤷🏼‍♂️
@radarw64
@radarw64 Год назад
@@bigboss-tl2xr Ok, so maybe unusual is the wrong word then. The Earth rotates, and the Moon does not. That is the usual way moons do I guess. haha
@Darth_Meow
@Darth_Meow Год назад
I like how you keep mentioning learning. It seems like the perfect segway to plug advertisements for Curiosity, Nebula or Skillshare.
@weldtheheckoutofitcorporat7823
Gabo estoy de acuerdo contigo con relacion a los inmigrantes. Todos tenemos derecho a soñar con una vida mejor, pero para nosotros los inmigrantes que vinimos legales, y como americanos que pagamos impuestos, recibir un tren lleno de personas todos los dias, se hace insostenible para cualquier Pais. A parte del hecho de una Frontera abierta donde entran indeseables aparte de la droga. Me gustan tus videos ya que igual que tu tenemos el mismo hobby. Buen vuelo y buenas tomas
@phillipamacker4343
@phillipamacker4343 Год назад
The aliens said not to come back.... Neal Armstrong...
@Scissors69
@Scissors69 Год назад
What did "Neil" Armstrong say?
@martinnewtonholmes
@martinnewtonholmes Год назад
Kneel Armstrong
@Scissors69
@Scissors69 Год назад
@@martinnewtonholmes - yeah! Him too. 😂
@thisguy35
@thisguy35 Год назад
i think it's more americans that are not really popular these days
@zmblion
@zmblion Год назад
Thanx to our lovely government
@jameswest4819
@jameswest4819 10 месяцев назад
That is not garbage, that is a priceless artifact.
@LordoftheCats
@LordoftheCats 8 месяцев назад
Good info in an understandable format. Thanks for that.
@agungokill
@agungokill Год назад
so it is harder to land on the moon than mars? if we assume there is mothership, that would be make sense
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
No, it isn’t.
@jrjubach
@jrjubach Год назад
We need to drill straight down when we get to the moon again. There's a theory that the moon is hollow and made out of a very hard metal impervious to asteroid impacts. The idea is, there's a couple kilometers worth of dust, then just a metal sphere. If you notice, no matter the diameter of the impact, the craters are all the same depth.
@Scissors69
@Scissors69 Год назад
Lunar craters are not all of the same depth. Their depths vary, roughly in proportion to their diameters To cite a few examples: Tycho is 85 kilometers wide and 4800 meters deep. Aristarchus is 41 km wide, 3000 meters deep. Picard is 23 km wide and 2400 meters deep
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
It’s a hypothesis, not a theory, and it’s a hypothesis made up by idiots that don’t know what they’re talking about. Or that are lying.
@picofaradactyl
@picofaradactyl Год назад
You radiate beauty, charm, and grace.
@martenapperloo1055
@martenapperloo1055 Год назад
That's because man never landed on the moo
@damienjordan55
@damienjordan55 Год назад
amazing that every impact on te moon is at 90 degrees leaving a perfect circle every time
@martinnewtonholmes
@martinnewtonholmes Год назад
Now that IS weird
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
Not really, especially since you’re lying.
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
@@martinnewtonholmes someone lying isn’t weird.
@scottbegley1719
@scottbegley1719 Год назад
Put magnetic landing pad that allows you to control the strength to guide landers and help with speed as it might reverse for launches all despite unstable gravity
@Tomcat71
@Tomcat71 Год назад
imagine if we spent this money on helping actual humans.
@martinnewtonholmes
@martinnewtonholmes Год назад
Isn`t this a line from a John Lennon song ?
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
There’s a whole lot of families eating today because their parents work in aerospace. We’re not just burning cash to power the rockets, it’s pumped back into the economy. Also, do you have any idea how much mineral wealth is in space? Literally quadrillions of dollars.
@qzwxecrv0192837465
@qzwxecrv0192837465 Год назад
Proximity sensors, radar, automated engine firing, etc should make this a walk in the park Are they using any of this technology or doing it manually? Makes one wonder
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
Perfectly oversimplified as only an amateur can.
@jetsengoytredkl
@jetsengoytredkl Год назад
@@UpperDarbyDetailing Keep commenting. Maybe someday he can be as smart as you 😂
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
@@jetsengoytredkl I can’t make someone follow the truth, I can only show them the way.
@UpperDarbyDetailing
@UpperDarbyDetailing Год назад
@@jetsengoytredkl lol
@McLovinSB84
@McLovinSB84 Год назад
@spacerace there is an editing error check your caption for your first segment.
@jcollinsg3
@jcollinsg3 Год назад
I saw that too and was confused. This video has nothing to do with the SpaceX investigation.
@esmenhamaire6398
@esmenhamaire6398 Год назад
Flat out wrong as to why those missions that attempted to land on the moon failed to do so. There are mascons on the Earth, too, and its oblateness also has to be accounted for when calculating satellite orbits. Landing failures at the moon have nothing to do with Lunar mascons (they really only affect the long-term evolution of Lunar sattelites orbits), and everything to do with the fact that sending stuff into space is hard; getting complex machinery, whether electronic or otherwise to continue working for very long in space is hard, too. This is due to things like extremes of temperature between sunlit and shadowed parts of a probe, vaccuum welding, radiation affecting electronics, and also just how the materials the probe is made of reacts to an environment like that rather than the relatively stable one that exists on the surface of Earth. India's failure on its first attempt at landing a probe on the moon happened due to the software that guided it being too constrained in what it was designed to cope with. I can't recall the exact details now, but apparently the programmers had been a tad over-optimistic in how accurately the probes trajectory could be flown, and how accurately and quickly the probe could control its attitude and thrust. That India's first attempt at a lunar landing went as well as it did until seconds before landing was quite surprising, and should be regarded very positively, rather than being simply written off as a failure. Their second attempt succeeded because the software was given rather more realistic parameters to work to, and that it succeeded wasn't much of a surprise, under the circumstances, but even so, Indians have every reason to be proud of their space agency's track record thus far. Missions to Mars have only recently started having good success rates, because lessons were learned from previous failures. But through most of the history of space exploration about 50% of all probes sent to Mars failed in one way or another, the worst one being due to a NASA subcontractor working in Imperial measure rather than the metric units of the specifications they were given, followed by NASA up to that point not being terribly good at checking that they got exactly what they paid for from subcontractors. Again, the lesson was learnt, and since then NASA checks that stuff built for them actually was built according to specs. Mars' atmosphere is as much curse as blessing, at about 1% the pressure of Earths. It's thick enough that it can't be ignored - come in too fast and too step and compressive heating will ruin your day - but it's thin enough that you can't just use rockets to slow down to subsonic speeds and then descend gently on parachutes, as can be done when landing on Earth. Drogue parachutes can help with the later stages of slowing the probe down, but actual landings have to be done under thrust. And, of course, there's the greater distance to get there so longer for hardware failures to occur beforehand, etc. This video would've been much better with a little more careful research, and would've avoided giving some of your viewers incorrect impressions about mascons, what they affect most, and to what extent they affect things. Downvoted.
@Drayghon
@Drayghon Год назад
Not watching, just wanted to point out we have things like the news, telescopes, governments, doctors, scientists, biologists, mineralogists and countless others. What have you got a camera and script?
@bigmartin343
@bigmartin343 Год назад
STARFIELD SPOILERS!!! Me: (Reading the comments without watching the video) "Gravitational anomalies you say? Sounds like Bethesda might know something..."
@razorindigo9680
@razorindigo9680 Год назад
Actually, earth has several gravity anomalies. There are many hills and mountains, where a ball will not roll downhill, but it will roll uphill. A car going downhill has to accelerate all going uphill. You don’t need to touch the gas pedal at all. In addition, there’s a huge gravity anomaly in the Indian Ocean.
@-______-______-
@-______-______- 10 месяцев назад
Out of the many, name just one.
@carine4318
@carine4318 Год назад
We all know that China Russia and India are in the race and most probably on the moon now staking their own real estate..exciting times ahead ..
@georget.8548
@georget.8548 11 месяцев назад
Stop it...its frozen water
@charlescouncill
@charlescouncill Год назад
Those landers that crashed were shot down by the resident aliens.
@MikaHalonen1974
@MikaHalonen1974 Год назад
4:06 Landing on the moon and sucks all the smoke. :D I know. Not funny. Kind of cool editing. No waste. No pollution. I like that. Human landings can't be eliminated because of humans by beloved aliens. No manned spacehips can be destroyed by them easily. Question: If they had 30 seconds of fuel left in the lunar module, how did it suffice to get back to the "mother ship"? Liked and subbed. Thank You!
@Scissors69
@Scissors69 Год назад
30 seconds of fuel before they'd have eaten into what they needed to lift off again. Simple as that
@av_kovko
@av_kovko Год назад
The cause of the crash of the Luna 25 station became known. Luna 25 has been crashed due mulfiction acceleration mensure unit integrated at Angle Velocity of Mensure Unit (Block Izmereniya uglovoy skorosri) (BIUS-L), zero readings were received in the on-board computer. The computer, without knowing the data, controlled the braking engines up to a time cut-off of 127 seconds, and not according to the speed data. As a result, the spacecraft came out of the perelune 18 km, and deorbited. Spacecraft impacted on Moon surface after 43 minutes after deboost.
@TommyTippy598
@TommyTippy598 Год назад
Wonderful video, very interesting and clear. Thank you so much. I had been wondering about this topic. Uneven gravity and no atmosphere whatsoever. Makes sense! 👋
@rukuram2031132
@rukuram2031132 Год назад
Very niece information Sir Thank you.
@martinnewtonholmes
@martinnewtonholmes Год назад
How is your Niece BTW ?
@st.charlesstreet9876
@st.charlesstreet9876 Год назад
Love this information on the landers ❤ Thank You!
@FutureEcho22
@FutureEcho22 Год назад
Best movie Hollywood ever produced! With Bollywoods latest production coming in second!
Далее
Something Weird Is Happening To The Moon..
10:37
Просмотров 119 тыс.
NASA Isn't Telling Us Something About The Moon
15:14
Просмотров 517 тыс.
Avaz Oxun - E'lon, erga tegaman!!!
11:47
Просмотров 254 тыс.
What Happened When The USA Nuked Space (declassified)
17:00
Something Weird Is Happening On Mars...
10:41
Просмотров 370 тыс.
The Nuclear Fusion Rocket Is Coming!
11:50
Просмотров 230 тыс.
The Soviet's 70 Year Old Abandoned Moon Base Plan
17:35
Back to the Moon FULL SPECIAL | NOVA | PBS America
52:57
Elon Musk Leaks Starship Flight 6 Update!
10:21
Просмотров 138 тыс.