Apollo 13  help!!!!!!!!!!?
490797
I got only one for you. The risk of entry is burning up in\nthe atmosphere. To steep and it Will burn up. To shallow and they skip off the atmosphere back into space.
628520
Look at how many sattelites we put up... there is something wrong with your reasoning, you're ignoring a lot of the facts.  How is it more difficult now?  A civilian recently built and flew his own spacecraft into space 3 times successfully.  Hundreds of satellites are orbiting the earth as we speak.  How does it seem space travel is more difficult?  We have several astronauts in a spacestation right now... Civilians have purchased tickets into space, the people on the space station have been relieve, replaced, etc multiple times... As far as the moon goes, there really isn't/wasn't any reason to go back, not a whole lot there if ya know what I mean ;)  They're working on mars projects continuously... just because a few landers and orbiters crash doesn't mean things are more difficult.  If you do some research you will find literally hundreds of crashes, mislaunches, explosions, and other quality errors; the old times make the number and degree of current mistakes seem almost trivial.  Science and technology have proven themselves time and time again when it comes to space, and it keeps getting better.
615623
This is as good a place to start as any -->\n\nhttp://www-istp.gsfc.nasa.gov/Education/bh2_2.html
823638
Although my wife's father performed fuel calculations for the original Apollo landing, I'll spare you that speech. Instead, I will encourage you to watch two programs. The first show is called Conspiracy Moon Landing that it currently showing on the National Geographic Channel and it pretty much obliterates all of the popular conspiracy theories.\n\nI would also encourage you to watch a movie called Capricorn One. Made it 1978, it is a fictional story about a fake mission to Mars. Although it is a science fiction story, it is a good example of how utterly impossible it would be to fake a moon landing for any length of time.\n\n12 men walked on the moon from 1969 to 1972 and we have neither the resources nor the technology to pull off that big of a hoax for so long. Hundreds of thousands of people have worked on the space program. It would be far easier to put someone on the moon than to try and fake it and keep it secret for nearly 40 years. \n\nThe landings came at a time when our space program was ultra competitive with the former Soviet Union. Remember how big of a deal it was when Sputnik was put into orbit? They had the technology to monitor our moon shots and transmissions. Don't you think they would have called us out if they had evidence that it was all fake? \n\nPerhaps the most definitive proof of our trip to the moon is what we left behind. For the last 35+ years, scientists have been beaming lasers to the moon and measuring the return times. How are they doing this? The beams are reflected back by equipment left on the moon on at 3 different locations.\n\nCase closed.
607814
No one else had flown around the moon. \n\nIts analogous to Lindy's flight across the atlantic. It may seem like they didn't accomplish much in hindsight, but consider the time -- no on from this planet had ever even approached another astronomic body. Much less, had anyone orbited it.\n\nThose of us who remember Apollo 8 (I think I was about 10) know the exhilaration of knowing the US had beat the pants off the Soviets. Star Trek was in its first season - good God, put it in perspective. We had 3 goddamn TV channels.
545496
I like to chat on the moon. It can get a bit chilly, but if you prepare in advance with a thermal suit, it is just fine. Also you can bounce really high while chatting.
371858
I am a big project Apollo fan and have done a lot of reading into this over the years (including the conspiracies). Armstrong has never talked openly about the moonlandings in public and most of what is reported from him has been hearsay. One thing I did read is that he was meant to say 'That's one small step for A man, one giant....'. I read also that the lunar ladder to the surface had to be modified after the landing as it was too short.
1143087
on www.nasa.gov\ngood luck
226356
You are confused. The first problem is getting into orbit. This is called "escape velocity."\n\nSecond, your speed around any body in space depends on its mass, your mass and the height of your orbit, or distance from the surface. The closer you are the faster you go. The farther out you are, the slower you go.\n\nAs for Apollo, look it up at NASA's web site or almost anywhere by searching Apollo Moon Mission.
361150
a good resource:\nhttp://www.orbiterwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page\nit links to everywhere that is Orbiter related\n\nespecially useful one:\nhttp://www.orbiterwiki.org/wiki/Orbiter_tutorials\n\nTo launch rocket, just keep pressing + buttn for max power, or use the Ctrl+[+] to make the power increased slowly, and permanent. Then when the plane reaches a certain speed, press the down button.
278952
The space shuttle went to the Moon???? Har, har, har.....! Right off the bat, your lack of knowledge about the manned lunar landings is glaringly evident.\n\n"...no way we could have past through the suns radiation belt..."\nGee whiz, with your vast education and expertise as an astrophysicist you must surely be right. Actually, you don't have the first clue about this subject. Get your head out of the sand and get the facts from genuine scientific experts at these sites -->\nhttp://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/waw/mad19.html\nhttp://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/books/apollo/s2ch3.htm\n\nThe only flight hardware that returned to the surface of Earth were the command modules. Where are they? See this website --> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/lunar/apolloloc.html\n\nFinally, before persisting with this idiotic notion about the lunar landings all being faked, just ask yourself a couple of questions --\n(1)rock and soil samples returned from the Moon were passed out to research groups around the world. After examination and scientific testing, all confirmed that the material was non-terrestrial (that means not of Earth) and met all the pre-conceived theories of what lunar material would be like;\n(2)of the thousands upon thousands of personnel directly involved in the manned lunar missions, not one has come forward with a word about the whole thing being faked\n\nInstead of running around hollering that everything was faked, take a look at some genuine information that quickly buries the "facts" proving a scam occurred at this website -->http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/tv/foxapollo.html\n\nThe only thing more incredible than the actual lunar landings is that so many numbskulls have been duped by the blather about it all being faked.
871827
1) Twelve 12 American astronauts have walked on the moon.\n\nApollo 11: Neil Armstrong & Buzz Aldrin\nApollo 12: Pete Conrad & Alan Bean\nApollo 13: << failed to land on the moon >>\nApollo 14: Alan Shepard & Edgar (Ed) Mitchell\nApollo 15: David Scott & James Irwin\nApollo 16: John Young & Charles Duke\nApollo 17: Eugene (Gene) Cernan & Harrison Schmidt\n\n\n2) Why haven't we been back?  \n\na) American astronauts visited the moon on six occasions.\n\nb) The "moon race" was an extension of the cold war. It was mostly about national prestige. We got there first and achieved our primary objective. There was some good science: surveys, measurements, sample collection. But it was mostly about being there first. Once we achieved our primary objective, there was no political will to go back. There still isn't.  Perhaps, if we discover He3 or something else valuable, there will be.\n\nc) I used to travel to Crested Butte, Colorado every year to ski. Because I don't go anymore, does it mean that I never went?\n\n\n3) What about the Van Allen radiation belts?  Wouldn't it have killed the astronauts?\n\nThe existence of the Van Allen radiation belts postulated in the 1940s by Nicholas Christofilos.  Their existence was confirmed in *1958* by the Explorer I satellite launched by the USA. \n\nThe radiation in the Van Allen radiation belts is not particularly strong.  You would have to hang out there for a week or so in order to get radiation sickness.  And, because the radiation is not particularly strong, a few millimeters of metal is all that is required for protection.  "An object satellite shielded by 3 mm of aluminum will receive about 2500 rem (25 Sv) per *year*."\n\n"In practice, Apollo astronauts who travelled to the moon spent very little time in the belts and received a harmless dose. [6]. Nevertheless NASA deliberately timed Apollo launches, and used lunar transfer orbits that only skirted the edge of the belt over the equator to minimise the radiation."  When the astronauts returned to Earth, their dosimeters showed that they had received about as much radiation as a couple of medical X-rays.\n\n\n4) The U.S. government scammed everyone?  \n\nIn 1972, there was a politically motivated burglary of a hotel room in the Watergate Hotel in Washington, D.C. There were only about six or eight people who knew about it. However, those people, including Richard M. Nixon, the President of the United States, failed to keep that burglary a secret. It exploded into a scandal that drove the President and a number of others from office.\n\nIf six or eight people couldn't keep a hotel room burglary a secret, then how could literally thousands of people could have kept their mouths shut about six faked moon landings? Not just one moon landing, but six of them!\n\n\n5) What about the USSR?  \n\nEven if NASA and other government agencies could have faked the six moon landings well enough to fool the general public, they could NOT have fooled the space agency or military intelligence types in the USSR. The Soviets were just dying to beat us. If the landings were faked, the Soviets would have re-engineered their N-1 booster and landed on the moon just to prove what liars Americans are. Why didn't they? Because the landings were real and the Soviets knew it.\n\n\n6) Why does the flag shake?  Where are the stars?  Who took the video of Neil Armstrong? \n\nTake a look at the first two websites listed below.  They deal well with all of the technical questions.\n\n\n7) Finally, please tell us what you would accept as definitive evidence that the six moon landings were real. Is there anything?
399830
They asked astronauts questions like this: "what if you had an oxygen leak and only had 10 minutes of air.  What would you do?"  The answer is "spend the next 10 minutes trying to find and fix the leak".\n\nSame thing for this question:  Try and survive any way you could.
1162840
I’m not sure about movie Apollo 3, but the only way to simulate a zero gravity is a free fall. The free fall can be generated by taking an airplane into a dive. And I’m not kidding. Obviously under these circumstances the experience of zero gravity will last for a few minutes only.\n\nThe simulation of work in space could be done by using buoyancy by submerging astronauts in a pool of water. For more information I would visit NASA site.
1033922
these might help you\n\nhttp://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast30nov_1.htm\n\nhttp://www.seds.org/spaceviews/9711/features.html\n\nhttp://realmagick.com/articles/86/1786.html
634196
I love the vomit comet statement.  I understand that Ron Howard used this when making Apollo 13.
50530
Depends on which era.  On Gemini the missions were short and they did it in their space suits.  I'm not sure on Apollo.  I had the privilege to work for a while with Dale Gardner, who rode on the shuttle. He said on the shuttle they did it on a toilet that sucked the stuff with a vacuum.  He was funny.  He said that feeling that blast of cold air really made it hard to do your business!