The Human Space Travel Hoaxes 1959-202334 new and old space staged events with and without humans aboard and how the first American relied on orbital equations solved by a little lady using a hand calculator
|
|
|
Media and readers of my web pages about atomic bombs 1945, moon trips 1969, M/S Estonia ferry incident 1994 and 911 tower top down into dust terrorist collapses 2001 are warned. You probably suffer from cognitive dissonance and cannot handle my information without getting mentally disturbed with serious consequences. My proven facts are simple and correct and good news. Atomic bombs do not work. Humans cannot travel to the Moon. M/S Estonia didn't lose her bow visor. Skyscrapers do not collapse from top down. All information to the contrary is pseudoscience, propaganda lies or fantasies promoted by media and taught at universities. And if you do not agree with the official lies, you will not be allowed at the university boat race* and other silly events, etc. Your position in society is at risk. If you suffer from cognitive dissonance, you no doubt find my info disturbing and get upset, angry, anxious or worried. What to believe and write? Old lies or truth? Media incl. newspaper chief editors are kindly requested to get psychological assistance to get rid of their cognitive dissonance. Why not cure yourself? And publish the result as a scoop. *Safety at sea is my business |
||
|
Warning 2 for pseudoscience Have you heard about Trofim X Lyssenko? You should. He was the inventor of pseudoscience around 1930! Stalin loved him. Pseudoscience is used to present a lie as truth in a scientific manner. It is however just silly propaganda! Fake/invented News! No Gagarin ever flew in space. It was just communist propaganda 1961. No Moon landings ever took place 1969 and later because humans cannot travel in vacuum space. It was just a clever and funny US/Hollywood show put together by Dr. Buzz Lyssenko. A nephew of Trofim! Neil Armstrong willingly played the role as first clown pissing on the Moon until he died some years ago. A pure product of Lyssenko. That human beings return to Earth by a fast re-entry starting at a location B in Earth upper atmosphere after a visit to the Moon or to the International Fake Station, IFS, is not possible either. There is no way to find the location B to start and reduce speed of the return vehicle, so the IFS is just another stupid hoax to confuse. The re-entry heat shield was invented by Dr. Buzz Lyssenko. An American her ... no, ... clown. All launches of >500 humans into space and their re-entries from space in various capsules and Shuttles 1961-2021 are 100% fake/invented! None ever took place! It was and is just a silly show to entertain us. I explain it below. |
||
|
Summary of this article 1.
This website logically and factually explains why
human space travel in
high speed orbits around
Earth, in variable speed
trajectories to the Moon or
Mars or anywhere in space and back is
not possible, even if rockets
actually work in the vacuum of space. There is no
way to return on Earth and do a safe
re-entry through the
atmosphere and land. You are always flying too fast
and cannot find the exact location
where to
re-enter in the upper
atmosphere and land 10 minutes later.
3. The Yuri X Gagarin around the Earth 1961 space orbit trip that started the hoax and the US/NASA foolish Moon trips 1969-1972 were simple fantasy and propaganda lies. The latter tricks were created in Hollywood studios to entertain us with useless US navy/air force pilots as actors, etc. All NASA Mercury and Gemini orbits around the Earth a little earlier were similar hoaxes. 4. Reason is simple; it is not possible to get away from planet Earth, land on and take off from the Moon (or Mars) and later make a safe re-entry and land on Earth again using a thin plate capsule - you are too heavy to start with and going too fast later and you will simply burn up as you cannot brake or reduce speed in the strong gravity field pulling you back to Earth. Same applies to any Shuttle or Soyuz or XpaceS Dragon capsule, if you visit the International Fake/Space Station. 5. All heat shields protecting spacecrafts (capsules, shuttles, etc) and InterContinental Ballistic Missiles, ICBMs, at re-entries are useless. They just melt. 6. Therefore only >500 cosmo clowns (or rather paid cosmo prostitutes) have flown to the Moon or around Earth in space or visited the International Fake Station, IFS, orbiting Earth every 90 minutes. Astronots dying on their way to the IFS are still alive on Earth. 7. Imagine when the US and European public finally find out that they have been fooled for more than 50 years by NASA & Co ... and the European Spax Agency, ESA,... and media. Media will not do it. Media will continue hiding the truth. 8. The Virgin GalactiX one hour in space is also a joke. It cannot ever return. Or this ESA RosettaX hoax incl. gravity assist kicks keeping some German/Swiss pseudo astrophysicists busy September/November 1993-2014. They found water at a comet in space 2014! The 5 December 2014 NASA OrioX spacecraft is also not real. Like the MessengeX and Stardust spaceships. Or the strawberries on the Moon. Or the latest, November 2015, Blue OrigiX rocket trip to 93 500 m altitude. All is fantasy fakery! 9.
The only serious space exploration company is
little Arianespace,
of which I am a share holder, so do not really
believe me until you have studied my web page. We
only send spacecrafts one way
up into orbits. They can never
return. |
The latest human space clowns on Earth are:
They haven't won my Challenge how to get off Earth in a space craft! To be a space exploration expert shouldn't you know the basics? Anyway: If you ask Google Why is that human beings cannot go into space?, you will get 11,700,000 results in 0.49 seconds but not find this website giving the answer. Reason seems to be that Google has been ordered to confuse matters promoting NASA and its nonsense. There are also plenty 'space scientists' and 'astronomers' that say that it is easy for humans to fly in space, so that they later can employ themselves at NASA to lie about and invent things about space and human space explorations. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is an independent agency of the executive branch of the United States federal government, i.e. the President. The main purpose of it is to invent pure lies about US space programs and aeronautics and aerospace research, some of which are described below: Part 1 (this one with 35 chapters split on two pages (2nd page)) is about 34 new and old space staged events with impossible trajectories, re-entries and gravity kicks - all inventions that evidently never took place. Only the 35th chapter is about me making money in space. Part 2 (17 great chapters) is about the 1969 Apollo 11 NASA hoax with two clowns on the Moon - it took place in Hollywood, Nevada and the Pacific. Not one American hero was in space then or later. Parts 3-6 (21 quite funny chapters) are about the NASA space Shuttle, the International Fake (Space) Station, a recent trip to Mars, re-entries, etc. All silly hoaxes. It seems all human space trips since 1961 are fake and just part of a show! No Americans have been in space and those that say they have been there are simply lying! Only satellites orbiting planet Earth seem to work, even if plenty people think they too are fake/invented. I pay since September 2012 anyone €1.000.000:- that can describe a manned space trip but no one has managed my Challenge. As most human space travel since 1962 has been organized and done by NASA costing US tax payers billions of dollars, it seems NASA has committed the biggest fraud in US federal history ... which is still going on. It would really be nice if anyone could stop this criminal deception once and for all. The fraud has had many faces: Maj. Gen. Charles X. Bolden, Jr., (USMC-Ret.), was nominated by President Barack Obama and confirmed by the U.S. Senate as the 12th Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. He began his duties as head of the administration on July 17, 2009. As Administrator, Bolden headed a nationwide NASA team to advance the missions and goals of the US space show ... incl. all hoaxes and frauds described below. Therefore his staff carry firearms: National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 - SECURITY Sec. 304. (e) The Administrator may direct such of the officers and employees of the Administration as he deems necessary in the public interest to carry firearms while in the conduct of their official duties. Bolden travelled to orbit four times aboard the fake/invented space Shuttle between 1986 and 1994, commanding two of the missions and piloting two others - all four 100% hoaxes! Imagine that the POTUS Obama nominated an actor to pursue the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's hoaxes. You just have to lie about humans in space! Note that the Wikipedia biography of Bolden does not include any verified references or sources. Bolden was probably just an actor. Some Bolden quotes: "NASA is not going to the Moon with a human as a primary project probably in my lifetime" ... "but maybe we go to an asteroid or planet Mars"! April 5, 2013 Bolden resigned on 20 January, 2017, and Robert X. Lightfoot, Jr. became Acting (LOL) Administrator of the NASA. He was just another actor, date of birth unknown, to continue the show! If Bolden resigned before or after receiving the POTUS' Regulatory Freeze Pending Review memorandum is not clear. Lightfoot became the space agency's acting Associate Administrator already March 5, 2012. That acting job became permanent on September 25, 2012. He had previously acted as Director of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, from March 2009 until his promotion in March 2012. Lightfoot says himself he is an engineer and has never been in space (as it is all fake/invented anyway). From 2003 to 2005, Lightfoot acted as assistant associate administrator for the fake/invented Space Shuttle Program in the Office of Space Operations at NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C. He returned to Marshall in 2005 as manager of the fake/invented Space Shuttle Propulsion Office. The only Shuttle seen flying is dropped from an airplane. In 2007, Lightfoot was named deputy director of Marshall where he shared responsibility for managing the center. He served in that capacity until becoming acting director on March 26, 2009, after the retirement of the previous actor. Lightfoot was formally named as actor of the Marshall Space Flight Center on August 24, 2009. He led Marshall through the transition from the fake/invented Shuttle era to the Space Launch System hoax. Lightfoot has received several awards during his acting career, including a NASA Outstanding Leadership Medal in 2007 for "outstanding and exemplary leadership of the fake Shuttle Propulsion Office" and "assuring safety for the shuttle's return to flight". Robert X. Lightfoot, Jr. was in charge of the NASA space show's latest act - OSIRIS-REx. He has been faking space trip fantasies all his acting life! The final one was the 2018 James Webb Space Telescope. Imagine what NASA invents and media just believe and trumpet as ... fake/invented ... news ... and the money disappearing in all directions. Lightfoot
resigned April 23, 2018 and joined
Firefly
Aerospace. On
September 1, 2017, the White House announced
that James
Bridenstine
(right) was President Donald Trump’s preferred
p(r)ick to head the NASA space hoax
show. Bridenstine
has spent most of his professional life in the
military and has focused heavily on space policy
since elected to Congress first time 2013,
stating If he knows that
NASA is mostly a show, is not clear
to me. The U.S. Senate
narrowly confirmed Bridenstine on April 19,
2018, by a party-line vote of 50–49. He
became the first member of Congress to lead
NASA. The United States is the preeminent spacefaring nation. NASA got us to the Moon, and we are still the only nation to land humans there. Our commercial space industry has become adept at launching rockets, building satellites, and will soon begin (sic) transporting humans to and from space. To ensure our country remains the leader in space, we need to change government processes and further leverage the innovation coming from the commercial sector. This will free up government resources to focus on the things that will take a national effort, such as getting Americans to Mars. As a Member of Congress, I am working to ensure that space can continue to contribute to and improve your quality of life. Jim has clearly not understood that NASA with its Americans on the Moon is a hoax from the beginning:
Part 1
If you find anything wrong among the long list of above 34 jokes, please tell me at anders.bjorkman@wanadoo.fr and I will correct it.
1.1 Purpose of human space travel
If you ask Google "is space travel possible for humans", you will be directed to 31.300.000 sites in 0,49 seconds suggesting human space travel is possible ... without any evidence ... and that this is the only site explaining it is not possible. If you ask Google "how to go to the toilet in a spacecraft", Google will direct you to only 669.000 sites in 0,70 seconds suggesting nonsense! One main reason is that NASA & Co cannot since 1969 explain how their heros go to the toilet in an Apollo spacecraft, Shuttle or in the International Fake Station, IFS ! When in space or in orbit the astronuts and kosmoklowns are floating around inside their spacecrafts. They are weightless. When they have to shit or piss, they act like rockets ... inside the spacecraft! The piss/shit is ejected one way and asstronut or kosmoklown moves the other way. They have to hold on to something ... and the shit/piss must end up in some container or similar strapped to the body. How do you do it? In your space suits? When holding on to something? NASA & Co have no ideas how to do it unless you believe this piss and this shit. Main Stream Media have never investigated the matter. Since 50+ years! If you ask Google "how does gravity affect a spaceship going from the Moon to Earth", Google will direct you to only 699.000 sites in 0.43 seconds suggesting that gravity may affect your spaceship but not how and why or how to plan a trip back to Earth. Going from the Moon to Earth was done several times 1969-1972 but Google cannot inform how the trajectory was simulated, calculated, planned and finally executed. Reason? It is not possible! Earth gravity force is much too strong and pulls you straight towards ground. There is no possibility to aim tangentially for an entry point at the top of the atmosphere, then brake and finally land safely ... on Earth, Mars or any planet, when coming from space. If you ask Google "what is purpose of human space travel?" you get 5.340.000 sites to look at in 0,41 seconds and #1 is: "Human space exploration helps to address fundamental questions about our place in the Universe and the history of our solar system". What the fundamental questions are, nobody knows, and why humans in space - and not on Earth - can provide the answers is unclear. It sounds religious and as Mark Twain said: "religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool". If you ask Google "why space travel is not possible for humans", this site is #1 of 42.000.000 with a few other sites only suggesting various difficulties. Google finally got it right. But media will not report it. There are thus some sites, like this one, demonstrating that human space travel is not possible for simple physical reasons. I am not alone. But, as I say, media will not report it. To confuse the issues one of the latest US silly space hoaxes is that there is water on planet Mars. It was announced Monday 28 September 2015 and you probably heard about it from media. There is no evidence that there is water on Mars! Media just copy/paste nonsense by 'experts'. Here is an ancient lake on Mars according NASA:  What a stupid joke! There is no way any spacecraft with a camera can enter and land on planet Mars and take photos. I explain why below. And media have never been there. A week later it was ice on Pluto! It is another NASA joke. Do you find it funny? Media don't. Media report it. But media have never been to Pluto! And 7 June 2015 it was the 'news' that the European Space Agency, ESA, is planning a village on the Moon, construction of which could start as early as 2024. Back side of moon, not visible from earth, would provide best conditions according to ESA new chief Jan Woerner apparently because it cannot be seen from Earth and is 50% of the time in the shadows of night so strawberries cannot grow there! Jan Woerner doesn't know that travel to the Moon is impossible and is therefore today in charge of the ESA Rosetta hoax described below.
1.2 Return, re-entry and recovery of rocket/spacecrafts are not possible Since the beginning of
sending (inexpensive) rockets with (expensive) payloads into
space, i.e. 1940's, there is a dream that the spacecraft
shall return, land and be recovered after having deposed the
payload/satellite in, e.g. orbit around Earth or the
centre of a town (a-bomb)
or on the Moon (Apollo).
But it is an
impossible dream. The spacecraft
has always too big speed and momentum to deliver
the payload, so it cannot carry the extra
fuel/energy to stop in flight and return empty to
where it started and to land again. The U.S. Space
Shuttle
was said to be able to reach, dock with and visit
the International Space Station, ISS, in
orbit around Earth at ~7 500 m/s speed and
then land and be recovered but it was and is a ...
hoax.
135 times between 1981 and 2011! All
fake/invented! There is no way that one spacecraft
can dock with another spacecraft in orbit around
Earth. Un-docking, re-entry and landing are
likewise impossible. The
Shuttle was going much too fast in low
orbit around Earth and would burn up at
re-entry, where you are supposed to start
braking at, say 120 000 m altitude in the upper,
almost vacuum atmosphere. But there is no
possibility to brake up there! It is almost
vacuum. Earth gravity just pulls you straight down
and ... you crash. All reusable rocket systems have failed or were amateur dreams from the start. However, there are, of course, still 2018 people believing it is possible. Let's therefore start this article with one such Teflon clown - Elon Musk. Elon, if he exists or is just a paid, cheap actor fooling around, is very busy in his photo shopped office and workshops but his rocket returns and recoveries are hoaxes.
1.3 Elon Musk and the amazing Falcon 9 first stage first recovery 21 December 2015 - with hypersonic grid fins - and the second 17 January 2016 failure of same thing - and the 1 May 2017 of it A XpaceS Falcon 9 rocket can carry 4.85 tons to GTO at cost $61.2 M, we are told by certain Elon Musk, owner of the company. I do not believe it. The rocket has two stages. It I can believe. The nine Merlin rocket engines (all produced in-house by XpaceS) of the first stage can provide almost 700 tons thrust that carries, in less than three minutes, the Falcon 9 to about 80.000 m altitude at 1.700 m/s hypersonic speed, where the second single (MVac) engine stage takes over bringing the pay load into orbit at e.g., 640.000 m altitude and 7.000 - 8 000 m/s speed. The second stage then either remains in orbit or (how, why?) drops down to Earth and is destroyed at re-entry. In the past also the first stage dropped down to Earth and was destroyed at the crash. After less than three minutes of use! What a waste!! Nine expensive Merlin rocket engines used only three minutes each and then ... scrap. But it will change! The Merlin engines shall be recovered and reused!
Ever heard of XpaceS? By June 2015, XpaceS was producing Merlin engines at the rate of four Merlin 1D engines per week with a total production capacity in the factory of a maximum of five per week. You wonder where all these, >200 new engines/year are used. XpaceS suggested that their latest rockets engines were 30% more effective than previous versions - why not? The exhaust gas velocity is 30% higher than before ... one way or other. The competition must watch. But do not worry! XpaceS lies about all of its projects and products. You should of course wonder why you build four engines per week when in the end you intend to recover most of the engines. Enjoy the latest, really stupid XpaceS hoax: The Falcon 9 first stage is today designed to survive atmospheric re-entry and to be recovered for re-use, handling both the rigors of the 150 seconds ascent portion of the mission (if any?) and the loads of the 435 seconds recovery or return portion, we are told. This was apparently done for the first time in history a pitch dark night 21/22 December 2015 above Florida, USA, as part of the XpaceS ORBCOMM-2 launch. The cute actress
left tells you more. Click on the link below her
and watch the show or click on http://www.XpaceS.com/webcast/
and drill down to video XpaceS /ORBCOMM and
click on it. Same show. All pre-recorded nonsense +
plenty CGI - Computer Generated Images. At a certain time
during the evening 21 December 2015 a
Falcon 9 rocket thus took off from some
launch pad into the dark Florida sky with plenty
people looking on TV screens inside some control
centre somewhere. It was 22 December in
Europe. After one minute and five seconds the
rocket (or whatever it was?) had speed ~340
m/s at ~8 000 m altitude and you
would expect a loud sonic boom to be heard
by anyone around but ... no sonic boom was heard.
XpaceS forgot to put it into the show. The
about $20M value first (empty) stage
finally - only 585 seconds after start -
apparently returned and landed at 0 m/s
speed at some area close to the original launch pad
and could be re-used. This article will
show that the recovery of the rocket first
stage never happened but was a magic
trick: Say that a
complete Falcon 9 rocket has mass about
460 tons, most of it fuel, of course. Say
that the second stage with fuel and
payload has mass 50 tons, most of it
fuel, too. The payload - the mass put
permanently in orbit - may be 5 tons. It
means that the first stage with fuel has
mass 410 tons. Say that the
empty first stage - 9 rocket engines, 2 big
fuel tanks, pumps, control equipment - to be
recovered - height 44 meters - has mass
25 tons, the first stage fuel mass is
then only 385 tons. If the second stage has
47 tons of fuel, it means that 432
tons of fuel is used to put 5 tons
payload in orbit or 86.4 tons fuel per ton
payload. Is it good? No! The Falcon 9
first stage has apparently two fuel/propellant tanks
- one for liquid oxygen (LOX) and one for rocket-grade
kerosene (RP-1) propellants. Each tank has diameter about
3.5 m and height ~20 m, i.e. volume ~190 m3. The
tank walls are made from an aluminum (sic - aluminium
in Europe) lithium alloy, according
XpaceS. Propellants are
fed from the tanks to engines combustion chambers
via single-shaft, dual-impeller turbo pumps
operating on a gas generator cycle. Don't ask me
how it works. It is all Elon's
fantasies. The Falcon
9 first stage has
also four 12
meters long landing legs at the bottom that will be
deployed via hydraulic pistons just before vertical
landing. Each leg weighs about 750 kg. It then
apparently takes about 150 seconds to burn
most fuel of the first stage of a Falcon
9 and to deliver the 50 tons seconds
stage incl. payload into space from 80
000 m altitude and far away from the launch
pad. Say that 345 tons of fuel was burnt by
the nine engines in 150 seconds. Say 40
tons of fuel was saved for the recovery
return stunt. Each of the nine
rocket engines burnt 256 kg/s fuel and
provided 77 tons thrust during a couple of
minutes, we should believe. Pretty good. The
first stage then continued upwards to almost
200.000
m altitude during 135 seconds due to its
own momentum after separation from the
second stage. No fuel is required for
it. The second stage continued upwards to >600.000 m altitude at increased speed ~7 000 m/s. The rocket first stage to be recovered - during the 135 seconds ascent - was flipped over 180° at supersonic speed using cold gas jets and was then adjusted - horizontally - so it could be slowed down - horizontally - by firing three rocket engines in exactly the right locations, times and directions ( horizontally towards land) in space - Boost Back burns. If
the fuel was at the bottom of the tank flying
nose forward, it was at the top of the tank
flying nose aft, i.e. it sloshed from bottom to
top and the CoG of the 24 tons lightweight
rocket must have shifted considerably during the
flip. This was happening at very high
velocity. IMO
it is impossible to apply a boost back thrust
with three engines as the fuel has shifted from
bottom to top of the tanks and cannot be pumped
to the engines. It
is also a very big, free weight moving
forward/aft in the two tanks affecting the
centre of gravity of the rocket. If the
first stage tips forward and the fuel
flows forward the turbo pump will suck ... gas,
the rocket engines' thrust, if any, will be
applied in the wrong direction,
etc. The
rocket is thus not stable while in
horizontal position so you cannot stop
the horizontal advance by firing a rocket
engine horizontally. The only stable
position is with the rocket aiming upwards with
all fuel in the bottoms of the
tanks. The rocket was
still ascending upwards and - horizontally -
into space until it, one way or another, arrived to
a location at
200.000
m altitude at 0 m/s subsonic speed - probably
far away from the launch pad. See sketch - not to
scale - right. There more burns were fired to bring
back the rocket first stage over the launch
area unless it wasn't already having speed in that
direction. The empty first
stage trip up to 200 000 m altitude thus
took 135 seconds firing a couple of
(impossible) Boost Back burns with three
engines to bring it back over land, assisted by
gravity for the vertical portion, and to position
it above the Landing Zone, so the vertical return
down must have taken 300 seconds.
Now the
first stage started to drop by gravity down
200.000
m into the atmosphere and onto the launch pad
or Landing zone 1 below. That drop took 300
seconds. It corresponds to an average vertical
speed of 666.7 m/s. Soon it was speeding
faster than sound again but ... no boom was heard.
OK! It was high up in vacuum space. The rocket was
again flipped - 90° this time - with engines
facing down ready to fire and slow down the drop.
All remaining fuel was back at the bottoms of the
tanks. There
are of course other trajectories of the backwards
somersault proposed on the Internet - e.g. right
- after I proposed my simple analysis above.
Here the
separation takes place only
20.000
m downrange from the launch pad at
70.000
m altitude and the first stage in then
ejected up to only
180.000
m altitude about
90.000
m downrange (at 05.25 LT), i.e. closer
to land than I assumed with less speed away from
land. There are two Boost Back burns in
vertical/horizontal positions a little
earlier pushing the first stage backwards at
150.000
(03.51 LT - it stops the
horizontal speed
800
m/s
away from the launch site) and
170.000
m altitude (04.29 LT - it brings the
rocket horizontally back to the
launch site in the right direction at
340
m/s
speed). The first stage then drops
vertically down free fall still moving horizontally
towards the landing site. The Entry burn is
at 50.000
m altitude (08.02 LT) and the Landing
burns at
<10.000
m altitude (08.40 LT). In my opinion
this alternative trajectory is as unlikely
as the one proposed by me. Nothing can fly like
it! If anything
freefalls from 180 000 m altitude, ignoring
air friction (there is no air there), it will reach
50.000
m altitude at 1 598 m/s hypersonic speed
after 163 seconds (or only 157 seconds
in the alternative trajectory - it goes faster
than gravity can accelerate it!!). Imagine that. It
will hit ground after another 30 seconds.
There was an
Entry burn and a Landing burn to slow
down the rocket first stage (see below) but
how Elon's experts stopped the flight - forces
applied and fuel used - is not clear. Hypersonic
grid fins steered the rocket, we are told.
You can see them sticking out at the top of the
rocket after alleged landing above and
left. Braking, steering
and positioning of the rocket in 3D-space was done
fully automatic by computers, we are also
told: Seagoing ships
(my specialty) are steered by a vertical
rudder fin (with no grids or holes) aft
in the water behind the propeller which can
yaw (or turn) the ship in the directions port or
starboard. Here we are told that a space travelling
rocket dropping vertically down on Earth due
to gravity can be steered in 3D space by
hypersonic grid fins ... in virtual
vacuum. The grids are diagonal! I would
prefer square grids. By rotating a deployed grid
fin a downwards (braking) and a sideways (steering)
force are applied to the rocket that tilts
sideways. Of course there
is very little air above
50.000
m altitude so you wonder how you can steer or
tilt anything up there with ... hypersonic
grid fins.
Personally I
think the whole rocket incl. fins look 100%
fake/invented. Especially after use. The amazing
upwards and backwards somersault
hypersonic/subsonic/0 speed loop and landing in
total darkness took totally only 435 seconds
after separation. The invited viewers at the
control station cheered ... what was seen on some
TV screens. That is show biz! The total
distance of the trajectory of the 435
seconds loop after separation was maybe of the
order say 435 000 m, so average speed during
the complete trajectory was about supersonic
1.000
m/s or more than twice the speed of sound. The
initial, total, upwards and away from target, speed
at 80.000
m altitude was 1 700 m/s, the speed
was 0 m/s at
200.000
m and 0 m altitudes, etc. Imagine how many
sonic booms (four!) all these speed up/down changes
would have produced. That nobody
noticed. Personally I
doubt that an object (Falcon 9 first
stage!) flying away in direction at hypersonic
speed away from the landing zone can be
stopped in flight going in that direction at
200 000 m altitude and then be brought
back horizontally above the original launch
location, while dropping down, increase speed to
hypersonic speed again ... twice ... and then land
at 0 speed down on ground again. You evidently
need fuel to create thrust to change
direction of and slow down a rocket - always in the
right directions. The questions are
therefore how much fuel was used for the
various Boost Back, Entry and Landing
burns, how was the thrust applied in the
right directions at the right times
and right location in the trajectory and how
was the mass of the first stage reduced from
say 65 to 40 tons during the
backwards 435 seconds somersault and drop,
when fuel was consumed? XpaceS has
not provided any answers except that all was
nominal. Media should ask real
questions and not report nonsense. But how do you
apply thrust in the right direction at
>1.000
m/s speed? Is the rocket really stable?
If you have
only 40 tons of fuel for recovery trajectory
burns of the first stage, you could fire
your rocket engines during total 156
seconds. The fuel consumption is 256
kg/s. Maybe you need to
fire two engines and apply 154 tons
thrust during the initial Boost Back burns
to re-direct the first stage back to zero
speed at 180 000 m altitude. The
vertical speed component is reduced to 0 by
gravity after separation - no fuel is needed for it
- but the horizontal speed component must be
stopped by rocket thrust and then you need more
fuel to accelerate towards land again and it may
use up total 120 seconds of fuel or 20
tons. Then one
engine at the Entry burn applies 77
tons of thrust to slow down the first
stage dropping down at hypersonic vertical speed
again onto the launch pad - it may use up another
64 seconds of fuel or 8 tons - and
finally one engine and 77 tons of
thrust during the Landing burn to stop the
first stage again at hypersonic vertical
speed just before touch-down on the launch pad -
using up the last 30 seconds of fuel
available - 4 tons. If anything goes
wrong, e.g. firing a rocket engine in the wrong
direction or at the wrong time or at
the wrong location, you will crash and the
first stage and its 9 engine become scrap
and cannot be re-used. Say that the
empty 44 meters long, first stage with its
valuable 9 engines, two big fuel tanks and some
fuel pumps + control equipment but no fuel has mass
23 tons. Dropping such a mass from
200.000
m altitude releases plenty potential energy ...
and you need fuel to produce thrust to stop
it ... unless you use hypersonic grid
fins - an Elon/XpaceS invention -
that can slow down rockets in free fall in
vacuum. Any mass dropped
from 180 000 m altitude with start speed
0 m/s experience first a sonic boom at
340 m/s speed and reaches about 127
seconds later vertical hypersonic speed about
1 100 m/s, when passing
130.000
m altitude. This is all due
to Earth's strong gravity and the fact that the
potential energy is transformed into kinetic energy
and increases the velocity! You must also consider
that there is no (or very, very thin) air at such
high altitudes braking the dropping mass.
With speed
increasing further, the first stage will hit
ground after less than 120 seconds or burn
up in the mesosphere like a meteor unless serious
braking takes place. Parachutes cannot be used at
such high altitudes - there is no air there. But
according XpaceS hypersonic grid
fins do the job - or at least steer it
towards the Landing Zone! Any mass dropped from 130 000 m altitude with vertical start speed 0 has hypersonic speed about 1 100 m/s, when passing 60.000 m altitude about 127 seconds later due to Earth's strong gravity and the fact that the potential energy is still transformed into kinetic energy and increases velocity! Dropping 70 000 m in Earth's gravity field increases your speed 1 100 m/s. It is hypersonic. During the amazing salto and braking the total mass is reduced from 65 to 25 tons, as fuel is consumed and the centre of gravity is shifted from about half height towards the bottom/engine end. The hypersonic grid fins' steering forces are applied at the top. The arrangement looks unstable in my opinion. Has it been tested in model or full scale? I have of course seen XpaceS videos of their rockets slowly landing ... always at very slow speed. Say however that you, one way or another, arrive at 16 500 m altitude at 1 100 m/s hypersonic, vertical downwards speed (more than three times the speed of sound!) and that applying 77 tons thrust during the last 30 seconds - the Landing burn - of the return trip burning 8 000 kg of fuel/energy will slow your 23 tons first stage down to 0 m/s speed (or 2 m/s?). Then the 23 tons first stage (no fuel left) will stop just on the ground. The deceleration is of the order 37 m/s² or almost 4g. The thrust to brake the rocket must be applied exactly in the right direction, altitude and time. If not the rocket will flip over and ... the brake force is applied sideways ... resulting in a crash. Above
we learnt that 1 kg of fuel can
produce at least
1.224.000
J energy (to get the rocket off
the ground), so 8 000 kg
should produce
9.792.000.000
J energy. But
to stop the first stage just to
land it seems you need at least three
times more fuel/energy! Not 8
tons but 24 tons of
fuel! You cannot simply drop 23 tons (forgetting the fuel aboard) from 200 000 or 180.000 m altitude and expect that rocket thrusts applied at hypersonic speed - in exactly the right directions - by, e.g. super efficient Merlin rocket engines, can stop it. It seems the XpaceS staff and Elon Musk have not understood it. So they invent fairy tales + hypersonic grid fins + landing on ground at 0 m/s speed in the middle of the night ... behind a screen. It happens that seagoing ships (my specialty) lose stability due to internal forces (bad loading) or external forces (bad weather) and the loss takes time and may result in capsize or sinking, when loose masses are shifting places. This 44 meters long, 23 tons heavy when empty XpaceS Falcon 9 rocket first stage does not appear stable in flight with all that fuel - 40-70 tons - sloshing around in almost empty tanks during the return and recovery. So when the Boost Back burns took place Elon could not be certain that they were done in the right direction (horizontally back towards land). Thus easier to fake it with a magician's trick - behind a screen. Haven't we seen it before? NASA did it already in the 1960's (Apollo) and 1980's (Shuttle). OK, the Apollo used parachutes and dropped into the Pacific and the Shuttle landed like a glider. Both were simply dropped off at low altitude from airplanes a little earlier. Here we saw a new invention by Elon and XpaceS - a vertical landing - on a TV screen. Personally I think the rocket was on the ground all the time ... hidden behind another screen. A cheap, magician's trick. With smoke added. Having followed the XpaceS Falcon 9 first stage recovery hypersonic grid fins hypersonic up/down show live on TV with young employees watching TV screens and cheering in the background, I consider the whole XpaceS/NASA thing a silly, standard NASA type hoax. It never took place in reality. It was a standard staged event using pre-recorded footage! All employees involved were cheap actors just speaking from scripts. The people cheering in the background were also just paid actors. It was not even Florida. It was California. But fun in a way. Doesn't hurt anybody (except US tax payers' pockets). But didn't we see something land in the dark night of Florida 585 seconds after the Falcon 9 rocket (or whatever) was launched on the show? Yes, we could see a slow fireball descending during about 30 seconds (or less). That was all. I assume it was something dropped from a little plane above the Landing zone to impress any viewers. All amateur videos posted on the Internet taken from far away just show the same darkness and a slow moving fireball (the exhaust flame?). It didn't arrive at >3 times the speed of sound, though. Five weeks earlier Kathy Lueders, manager of NASA's (fake!) Commercial Crew Program, said in a statement after Elon Musk's XpaceS had (November 2015) won a $2.6bn contract with NASA to send humans and supplies to the fake, non-existing International Space/Fake Station, IFS: "It's really exciting to see XpaceS (and Boeing) with hardware in flow for their first crew rotation missions. It is important to have at least two healthy and robust capabilities from U.S. companies to deliver crew and critical scientific experiments from American soil to the space station throughout its lifespan." XpaceS is
just another excited loser of my Challenge
but winner in the NASA criminal
human space travel hoax that started
1959 - 56 years ago. But did
XpaceS place the ORBCOMM satellites
in orbit, while faking the first stage
recovery stunt? Who cares? Arianespace
does it much better, i.e. launch satellites in
space with a low cost single engine first stage
(assisted by solid fuel boosters) and a second
stage like XpaceS. On
17 January 2016 XpaceS
was in hoax action again - the Jason-3
mission - with another attempt to save the the
first stage. Now the girl presenting the
show was a blond Southern California type (an
actress from Hollywood?). In order to save fuel the
first stage was supposed to land on an
un-manned barge somewhere in the Pacific Ocean
below the trajectory (to the South Pole), so only
one Burst Back burn in horizontal
position was required to bring the first
stage horizontal velocity to zero after it
had flipped 180° and positioned itself
horizontally in the correct direction
(towards the North Pole) with 30-40 tons of fuel
sloshing around in the tanks. This apparently took
place and a little later the first stage was
seen (on
video)
coming down at low vertical speed but not
straight on the rolling barge. A fire extinguishing
nozzle on the barge was automatically spraying sea
water sideways (?) for some reason, while the
rocket engine was producing the final Landing
burn scorching the deck plate, and the rocket
first stage attempted landing. One 12 meters
long, 750 kg heavy support leg (of four) - they are
at the last moment pushed out by some hydraulic
pistons one of which was broken? - however failed
and the rocket tipped over and was suddenly
horizontal on the barge deck hitting the deck side,
where first it produced white smoke at the
bottom end and a fraction of a second later it
exploded producing a fireball, etc,
etc, so nothing more could be seen. It seems the
rocket remained on the barge. Catching fire,
smoke, explosions and fireballs are standard tricks
of video fakery, so I believe the whole thing,
i.e. the landing, was fake ... again. I would have
thought that the 44 meters high first stage
would bounce off the barge diving into the sea
before catching fire and exploding but then the
visible magic effects - fire, smoke, explosion,
ball of fire - would not have been
there. 3: Landing
leg fails 4: Rocket
falls on pitching/rolling barge towards the side.
Note the black bottom - soot? - of the rocket and
the clean top and the sharp boundary between!
Magic! Why are these
stupid video shows - with technical failures -
done? Answer: Just to impress the Americans
believing anything shown on TV. They believe
XpaceS is top of the pops - failures happen
- but in the end all will be OK, Elon is a genius,
etc. It is just a variation of all NASA
hoaxes. The above video was pre-recorded trick
film. The
latest XpaceS show was the 1 May 2017
top secret Mission
NROL-76!
The latest fake/invented XpaceS Falcon
9 first stage recovery then took place
as follows: # Event Time m.s after start Altitude (m) Total velocity (m/s) 1 First stage separation 2.24 71 100 1 673 2 Boost back burn starts 2.42 93 300 1 523 3 Boost back burn ends 3.17 129 000 849 4 4.13 161 000 423 5 5.28 157 000 485 6 6.18 126 000 906 7 6.46 98 400 1 160 8 Entry burn starts 7.12 66 100 1 401 9 Entry burn ends 7.38 37 700 737 10 8.04 16 700 766 ! 11 Landing burn starts 8.34 3 200 281 ! 12 8.51 100 90 13 8.51 0! 82 14 8.56 0 39 15 Landing legs 8.57 0 27 16 9.02 0 0 17 Landing burn ends 9.04 0? 0! The F9
rocket first/second stages separate after 144
seconds flight after takeoff at 1 673
m/s speed up/away from the Florida launch area
at 71 100 m altitude - event #1. 18
seconds later the first stage three engines
35 seconds Boost back burn starts at
93 300 m altitude to bring the first
stage back above the landing area. 35
seconds later it is at 129 00 m
altitude and the speed is reduced to 849 m/s
direction still up/backwards. Events #4-7 is the
up/backwards first stage saltomortal to >160
000 m altitude dropping at increased speed down
on the landing area. Event #8 is when the 26
seconds Entry burn starts at
66.100
m altitude and vertical, downwards speed is
1 401 m/s towards the landing area. The
Entry burn ends 26 seconds later and the
speed is reduced to 737 m/s at
37 700 m altitude. So the first stage
rocket drops 28 400 m during 26
seconds at average speed 1 069 m/s.
Why not? The first stage rocket must slow down. But
now the speed increases again - event #10 - to
766 m/s at 16 700 m altitude.
Gravity in action! However - 30 seconds
later the vertical speed is only 281 m/s
at 3 200 m altitude. The average
speed was 523.5 m/s during a drop of
13 500 m ... but then you should drop 15
705 m. But how could the speed drop by 485
m/s with no rocket thrust applied? Air
friction? So the Xpaces
recovery trajectory fakery takes here place
between events #10/11. Of course all footage
is CGI but the speeds and altitudes must also tally
at least a little. As usual we have no ideas how
much fuel was used for the Boost back, Entry
and Landing burns to recover the empty 23
tons first stage, but as already shown above it
is of the order >60 tons, which cannot be
carried from lift off. And the 30 seconds
Landing burn starting at 3 200 m
altitude! The vertical velocity was reduced
from 281 to 90/82 m/s in 17
seconds. Yes, with an average velocity 183.5
m/s during 17 seconds you travel
3 200 m. And then you crash!
I really wonder
why I waste my time analyzing this
rubbish.
1.4 US National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 The US National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 rules: ACCESS TO INFORMATION It means that any details how XpaceS did its magic 21 December 2015 show are secret. I obviously know XpaceS faked it. XpaceS could never have performed the return flight and landing as indicated in the show. Luckily it is not illegal to inform that US human space travel is 100% fake/invented as it does not affect US national security. 
1.5 NASA's strawberries on the Moon plans But let's
start with the fantastic NASA's
strawberries on the
Moon
plans 2015. It seems that
(according
Jeff
Hanley,
NASA's Constellation program manager
2009/10 until the project was
abandoned)
... ...
The amount of rocket energy it takes
to accelerate those kinds of payloads away from
Earth doesn't exist anymore, ... It
exited in the Apollo era with the Saturn V.
Since that time this nation has retired that
capability. Hanley has before 2010 received numerous awards from NASA for his service including the NASA Outstanding Performance Award, the NASA Quality Increase Award, the NASA Sustained Superior Performance Award, the NASA Performance Award, the NASA Silver Snoopy Award, the NASA Exceptional Service Medal and the NASA Exceptional Achievement Medal. After the above frank announcement 2009 Jeff has made a fantastic career at NASA Johnson Space Center, doing some jobs elsewhere simultaneously. He was Associate Director for Strategic Capabilities, 5/2010 - 9/2011, Director, Human Exploration Development Support, 10/2011 - 8/2013, Deputy Project Manager for Verification, James Webb Space Telescope Project, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, 8/2010 - 9/2013, Director, EVA (space walks!!) Management Office, 8/2013 - 2/2015 and is today Principal Director, Human Exploration and Space Flight, The Aerospace Corporation, 3/2015 - today, Houston, Texas. I assume Jeff is therefore handling the very important NASA strawberry project today as NASA has retired the capability to put humans in space. He is obviously a typical NASA con artist just doing his parts of the show inventing new silly projects as required. Maybe he doesn't even exist? NASA or the US government (GWB, Obama or their wives?) has therefore announced plans to grow plants, e.g. strawberries on the moon by 2015 instead in a project designed to further humanity's chances of successfully colonizing space. If (!) successful, the Lunar Plant Growth Habitat team will make history by seeding life from Earth on another celestial body for the first time, paving the way for humans to set up more permanent habitation. Unless the project is cancelled of course. When will the strawberries be launched - http://www.NASA.gov/launchschedule/? It looks dark! For more information about the future of human space exploration at NASA visit: http://www.NASA.gov/exploration. And info about future NASA missions - http://www.NASA.gov/missions/future/index.html. Another funny link! There are no future missions or launches! But "If we send plants and they thrive, then we probably can," says NASA. If, Probably! Here US asstronut Dr. Buzz Aldrin was planning strawberry fields on a sunny day on the Moon already 1969 (or wasn't it in a Hollywood studio in Nevada?):  "Thriving plants are needed for life support (food, air, water) for colonists. And plants provide psychological comfort, as the popularity of the greenhouses in Antarctica and on the Space Station show ... says NASA. Psychological comfort! Dr. Buzz is an alcoholic today using the old, good, stuff - Moonshine. Not available on the Moon, though! "Everyone (sic) dreams about what living on some distant celestial body would be like. The human race has only ever stepped foot on our Moon, though, and it's not a habitable environment. However, NASA is looking to change that, starting with growing plants on the lunar surface, ... says NASA! Everyone dreams! These are evidently just dreams by drunken clowns, i.e. NASA, Buzz and Jeff. Strawberries on the Moon! There are 14 days sunlight on the Moon and 120C temperature in the sun followed by 14 days of darkness (no sunlight) and -120C temperature at any Moon location. Why is that? The Moon rotates around itself and around planet Earth in 27.322 days so a Moon day is long and hot like a Moon night is cold ... and long. NASA missed it. The climate on the Moon is no good for strawberries. Or salad! But NASA gets $ billions to promote the nonsense. US taxpayers are not very bright, believe anything and pay.
If you wonder
what NASA stands for the answer is:
Never A Straight Answer
or Not A Serious Agency
or Naughty Adults Swigging
Alcohol. Try yourself with all NASA
employees mentioned above and below. This web page is however about past human space travel and humans on Earth just stealing money from their governments to keep up the silly illusions and myths about space travel of all kind (and water on Mars and strawberries on the Moon). Dr. Buzz Aldrin and his friend first man on the Moon Neal Armstrong were just stealing money from US tax payers. It was funny. Human space travel is not possible but this fact apparently affects US national security and is classified. You should wonder why? Why should it be secret that humans cannot travel in space, e.g. fly to the Moon or the IFS (the International Fake Spacestation)? One reason is that you cannot carry the fuel with you to carry out and then execute the very complicated maneuvers out of Earth's gravity field and into, e.g. the Moon's gravity field and land and then start and return out of the Moon's gravity field and back into Earth's strong gravity field. Each maneuver involves applying an exact force at the right time, direction, duration and amplitude to change the momentum and direction of the spaceship, so it will arrive at the next waypoint and for that fuel is required. No mistakes are permitted because to correct a mistake more fuel is required ... which you do not have anyway.
Another reason is what happens at re-entry, i.e. when a spaceship with humans aboard tries to return to Earth from space, e.g. the IFS. Re-entry is said to begin in the thermosphere at about 130.000 m altitude, where there is very little air. A mysterious, strong force (drag!) develops out of nowhere and slows down the spacecraft. You can study the NASA automatic re-entry software here developed already 1965. It is quite easy to simulate what happens to a diameter 2 m steel ball arriving horizontally above ground at 130 000 m altitude at 8.000 m/s speed being attracted vertically by gravity while penetrating the atmosphere getting thicker going down. The hypersonic landing will take 283 seconds and the distance travelled through the air will be about 1.132.000 m, while average hypersonic speed (4.000 m/s) is reduced due to air friction. The brake force due to friction will peak at about 23.5 g, while the steel ball heats up to 7.348 K according the Stefan-Boltzmann law, i.e., it melts before hitting ground like all ICBMs and astronuts returning from the Moon or the ISF, not to forget all meteors dropping down on Earth from space. At
80.000
m altitude, the air density is about
0.00001846 kg/m3.
The few air molecules affect the spaceship a lot;
heat it up and deform it! At sea level the
density of air is
66.000
times bigger or 1.225
kg/m3,
but it is only 0.4135
kg/m3
at 10.000
m altitude and only 0.001027
kg/m3
at 50.000
m altitude. 99% of all
molecules of the atmosphere are located below
50.000
m altitude. All solid
meteors dropping into the atmosphere from space
are vaporized before passing
50.000
m altitude in the mesosphere and only bits and
pieces of them may reach ground. Imagine that only 1% of the molecules, atoms or other particles high up of the Earth thermo- and mesosphere manages to destroy all meteors trying to crash on Earth. A spaceship is not a meteor. It must first find and arrive exactly at a location B at 130.000 m altitude in the thermosphere at the right time, speed and direction (while the Earth rotates - your arrival speed is >20-30 Mach) and second plunge into atmosphere to slow down and third travel >3.000.000 m in the right direction during 10 minutes, while slowing down to drop down - hole in one - in front of a pick-up team. It is physically and practically impossible. NASA lamely suggests it is 100% computer controlled. The collision contacts between the molecules in the very thin air and the spaceship at high altitudes produce both heat warming the spaceship, so it finally catches fire, and pressure that over stresses and destroys the metal structure of the spaceship. It is not good for the humans aboard! It is suggested that heat shields and ceramic tiles may prevent it, but it is just propaganda. Heat and pressure are just concentration of real molecules or atoms or particles that happen to be in the way of the fast speeding spaceship. One thing the molecules or atoms or particles in the thin air cannot do at a re-entry is to slow down the spaceship with or without heat shields and tiles in an orderly fashion - compared to landing an airplane at <1 000 m altitude and slow speed. Why is that? Listen: (From NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF THE APOLLO 4 RE-ENTRY TRAJECTORY - Ermioni Papadopoulou) In hypersonic flights, the directional velocity of the fluid particles is much larger than the fluctuation velocities of the molecules of the flow. Thus, the flow kinetic energy before the bow shock is much larger than the internal thermodynamic energy of fluid particles. In atmospheric re-entry conditions, i.e. high altitudes and hypersonic speeds three physical phenomena affect the aerothermodynamic state of the flow in the shock layer: Re-entry of spaceships happens in a low density hypersonic flow, where typical re-entry velocities are about Mach 30+, i.e. the spaceship moves through the very thin thermo- and mesosphere at very high altitudes 30 times faster than that information can be spread. It creates shock waves. The actual position and behavior of the shock waves, especially the angle they create towards the flow direction depends highly on the geometry of the spaceship. At the collision shocks between the spaceship and the few molecules in the atmosphere you have very large temperature jumps/spikes. There are vibrational excitation, chemical reactions and non-equilibrium flow in the inviscid shock layer and basically no friction. Model tests in low density almost vacuum flow and at great velocities are impossible to do. It is all very confusing = no real scientist can explain it = only NASA pseudoscientists will invent something for Hollywood to spin on. NASA believes that the resistance, drag or brake force is a function of velocity square, air density, the drag coefficient Cd (a function of the shape and also of the Mach number) and the area of the spaceship but it applies only at much, 30-40 times lower velocities and much, 1 000 - 10 000 times, higher air densities at very low altitudes. Earth's gravity force also ensures that the spaceship, regardless of re-entry direction, just goes faster and faster vertically down at high altitude. It is suggested by various 'experts' that a lift force develops depending on the re-entry angle of the spacecraft, so it may bounce up leaving the thin atmosphere again. It does not happen to meteors though. Lift forces only develop at <20.000 m altitude. The kinetic energy - half mass times velocity square - via collision contacts in the thermo- and mesosphere is then converted into thermal energy - heat - that leads to the creation of plasma, i.e. very high temperature that vaporizes the meteors. Via the Stefan-Boltzmann law it is possible to calculate the temperature that the spacecraft will be subject to, so it would be destroyed like a meteor before 50.000 m altitude. Maybe only some really solid bits and pieces will survive and drop down on Earth? No, it is only possible to send spaceships or satellites one way up and out into orbits around Earth or Sun. They cannot ever return. Re-entry is not possible. This fact and many others have been withheld and you have to read about them here. You should then ask: Why have you been told that human space travel is possible? Because it is propaganda! Or a joke! Wikipedia suggests re-entry is possible: Various advanced technologies have been developed to enable atmospheric re-entry and flight at extreme velocities. The Wikipedia article is 100% non-sense and forgets the Gagarin fake re-entry described below and that you have to find this location B at 130 000 m altitude in the thermosphere to start any re-entry.
1.8 Juri Gagarin re-entry! The first human making a re-entry after a space trip was Soviet citizen Juri Gagarin 12 April 1961, i.e. 59 years ago. It was not a simple US test straight up into space using a rocket, straight down back again to Earth trip using gravity and parachutes. No, no! Njet, Njet! It was a one-man show! It could have been a two-men show. No big difference but two men alone in a spacecraft during 108 minutes was suspect. Better do it one-man alone to make only one hero ... not two! His top secret space trip was an around the Earth in less than two hours trip, i.e. 108 minutes, an about 40 000 km long straight trajectory about 65° ENE from Baikonur cosmodrome in Kasakhstan SSR according the Soviet propaganda at the time ending almost where it started. All is 2021 still top secret except below nonsense:
Gagarin's Vostok spaceship (a 2.1 m diameter hollow accommodation steel globe + a brake rocket module attached to it - details unknown) was (6.07 Local Time, LT) accelerated in about 10 minutes to about 7 500 m/s speed at 350.000 m altitude by some external fireworks and flow then ENE (6.17 LT) straight over Siberia, Kamtjatka, down over Pacific Ocean to the tip of Antarctica and up over South Atlantic and Africa heading home. Yes, it is a straight course all the time. He spent 33 minutes (06.37 - 07.10) in a very cold, short night with little time to sleep. Total time in orbit was 89 minutes! Over Angola and about 8 000 km from home the brake rocket fired for 42 seconds (7.25 LT) and the Vostok spaceship started descending from about 350 000 m altitude, while total - horizontal/vertical - speed increased. Only 10 minutes later at about 4 000 km from home above Egypt the accommodation globe separated from the rocket module and both units hit, like meteors, the atmosphere at 130 000 m altitude at about 8 500 m/s total speed (7.35 LT) and now only air friction (!) would stop the trip = re-entry. The vertical speed downwards could have been about 400 m/s and with that speed Gagarin would have hit ground after only 250 seconds or four minutes ... ignoring gravity. Gravity will of course speed you up! The air is much too thin at 10.000 - 130.000 m altitude to slow any spaceship down as described earlier above. The collision contacts with molecules will on the other hand heat you up until you catch fire, break up and are vaporized. Like all meteors dropping through the atmosphere every day. Air friction alone however - according to soviet communist propaganda - managed to slow down Gagarin’s little steel, cannon ball shaped globe (mass about 2 000 kg) in about 1 000 seconds according Soviet info, i.e. braking was at little less than 1 g, before hitting ground. Imagine that – air friction braking for less than 10 minutes, while flying almost horizontally 4.000 km without any wings and dropping only 90.000 m (or 90 km!) ... in a little steel ball. The average vertical speed downwards was only 90 m/s. If you drop anything, e.g. a 2 000 kg steel ball, from 90 000 m altitude with zero vertical start velocity, it will hit ground below at 1.328 m/s vertical speed (due to gravity g 9.82 m/s²) after only 135 seconds ignoring the atmosphere friction. If you consider atmosphere friction influence, it will hit ground after say 270 seconds or four or five minutes ... or less. But Gagarin flow - without wings 15-16 minutes - in his hollow steel globe! Gagarin didn't report a steady 1 g brake force during 1 000 seconds but reported an 8 g sudden, much stronger brake force during much shorter time somewhere in the atmosphere. It was the first human re-entry in history. 100% fakery! The Vostok globe didn't burn up, didn't start to spin, etc. It flew steady like a canon ball at Mach 20+ speed. It was magic! Reportedly it had been tested once before with a dummy inside or with another person crashing in China. But everything was just standard, communist propaganda. At 7 000 m altitude and unknown speed, Gagarin was ejected out of his globe at 7.55 LT (the hatch opened outwards) and Gagarin deployed his parachute. Gagarin landed 8.05 LT – 280 km west of Baikonur. Either the initial straight trajectory was a little - 0.007° - too much left at start or they forgot the rotation of the Earth during the trip or the wind at 100 000 m altitude over Middle East pushed it westwards? The empty accommodation globe with its parachutes deployed a little later reportedly landed nearby and bounced on the frozen ground and was picked up and has become a museum piece sent around the world to be looked at. Imagine that! Where the rocket module ended up, nobody knows. Or it burnt up? Only witnesses of the historic landing were two schoolgirls late for school and a lonely kolschos farm worker inspecting his frozen land. Spring had not yet arrived. Another version (BBC) is that little (5 years old) Rita Nurskanova saw the orange parachute with its pilot landing in her grandmother's potato field somewhere south of Moscow. Rita ran and told her granny that a Russian speaking stranger had just landed. Gagarin explained to them that he came from space! It is a nice piece of Soviet 1960’s communist propaganda. Clearly the trip never took place. The re-entry was not possible. Gagarin was just the first kosmos klown! Seven years later, 27 March 1968, Gagarin was dead in a mysterious air crash and could not provide more info. Reason for the 1961 kosmos show was simply that Soviet union was (1) falling apart after the death of Stalin 1953, (2) the communist comrades lacked faith and (3) the attempt by the people in power to keep it. The absolute easiest way to improve morale was to create a HERO! A SOVIET HERO! A FAKE HERO OF THE SOVIET UNION! Gagarin! I assume Gagarin + globe was ejected from an airplane Apollo 11 (part 1 of this article) style, even if it was not necessary either with only three witnesses on the ground. But maybe Gagarin wanted to do at least a parachute jump? The whole thing took little less than two hours from start to finish. Soviet (government controlled) media made a big thing of it. Gagarin became a Hero of the Soviet union, got a car, big flat, access to shops with foreign goods, had a French mistress for a while, etc, etc! The Cold War space race really started. And the poor people of the Soviet union had 1961 something new to believe in until the whole thing collapsed 1991. But any details of the trip are still top secret 2021. The details were just inventions of something that never took place. The Americans evidently played the game and acted that they were horrified and JFK decided to send fake humans into space too. The Americans didn't call the bluff of the communists! It would have been easy to pull the pants of the commies 1961 and say they were lying. Or that it was a joke! But maybe a POTUS Executive order had already been given to fake it?
1.9 John Glenn re-entry! NASA/JFK
therefore presented its own Earth orbit show
with a Mercury
Atlas 6
capsule. But it was a joke! In 1962, as
NASA prepared for the orbital mission
of John
Glenn,
a lady named Katherine
Johnson
was called upon to do the work that she would
become most known for. She was 99 years old
2017 still lying about it. The complexity of
an orbital flight had required the
construction of a worldwide communications network,
linking tracking stations around the world
to IBM computers in Washington, DC, Cape Canaveral,
and Bermuda. The computers had
been programmed with the orbital
equations that would control (?) the
trajectory of the capsule in Glenn's
Friendship 7 mission, from blast off to splashdown,
but the astronauts were wary of putting their lives
in the care of the electronic calculating machines,
which were prone to hiccups and blackouts. As a
part of the preflight checklist, Glenn asked
engineers to "get the girl" -
Katherine
Johnson
- to run the same numbers through the same
orbital equations that had been programmed
into the computer, but by hand, on her desktop
mechanical calculating machine. "If she says
they're good," Katherine
Johnson
remembers the astronaut saying, "then I'm ready
to go." So on February
20, 1962, Glenn flew the Friendship 7
mission and became the first American to
orbit the Earth three times, arrive
at location
B in
the upper atmosphere (easy to find at
120.000
m altitude!) at great speed to start the
re-enty, plunge into the atmosphere and then
drop down in front of a waiting war ship. Thanks to
Katherine
Johnson.
It was stupid propaganda ... to promote
Afroamericans. Glenn's
flight was also an enormous propaganda
success, that marked a turning point in the fake
competition between the United States and the
Soviet Union in space. Thanks to Katherine
Johnson
and her desktop mechanical calculating machine.
And the orbital equations? Better
forgotten! After the tower was jettisoned, the Atlas and spacecraft pitched over still further, giving Glenn his first view of the horizon. He described the view as "a beautiful sight, looking eastward across the Atlantic." Vibration increased as the last of the fuel supply was used up. Booster performance had been nearly flawless through the entire powered flight. At sustainer engine cut-off it was found that the Atlas had accelerated the capsule to a speed only 7 ft/s (2 m/s) below nominal. At 14:52 UTC, Friendship 7 was in orbit. Glenn received word that the Atlas had boosted the MA-6 into a trajectory that would stay up for at least seven orbits. Meanwhile, computers at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland indicated that the MA-6 orbital parameters appeared good enough for almost 100 orbits. Inside were 120 controls: 55 electrical switches, 30 fuses and 35 mechanical levers for Glenn to look after. There was also a control stick (see below). Once in orbit, it was not possible for the Glenn to change the trajectory except by initiating re-entry. During the trip Glenn took photos of the Earth including:
using this little camera:
After three orbits Glenn flipped the capsule 180° facing and flying backwards at 8 000 m/s speed, while braking using a little rocket engine three times in orbit an to enable a fantastic, magic re-entry. How much the speed was reduced by rocket braking is not known, but it canot have been much. ... Retaining the retro package meant he would have to retract the periscope manually. He would also have to activate the 0.05-g sequence by pushing the override switch. Friendship 7 neared the California coast. It had been four hours and 33 minutes since launch. The spacecraft was maneuvered into retrofire attitude (i.e. flipped 180° flying backwards with bottom forward) and the first retrorocket fired. "Roger. Retros are firing. ... Are they ever. It feels like I'm going back toward Hawaii.", Glenn radioed. The second and then the third retros fired at five-second intervals. The spacecraft attitude was steady during retrofire (i.e. flying backwards with bottom forward still in orbit). Six minutes after retrofire; Glenn finally maneuvered the spacecraft into a 14-degree nose up (?), pitch attitude for re-entry. Imagine that! Gliding backwards all over USA from California to Florida with a 14-degree nose up, and then doing a 437 seconds reentry, while slowing down from >8.000 m/s speed to 100 m/s for parachutes being activated and then a splash-down in the Atlantic. Glenn talked camly with ground-control during the reentry! What a stupid Hollywood radio show.
 A worn control stick (above) was used by Glenn to steer the capsule during the flight and re-entry: Glenn was an experienced pilot before the Mercury Program. His control stick was very similar (sic) to those used in aircraft, but it controlled only the direction the capsule pointed in space. As a Marine aviator, Glenn flew 59 combat missions in World War II and 90 missions in two tours during the Korean War. This was however the first time Glenn was flying backwards (!) at supersonic speeds in a spacecraft without wings through the thin atmosphere getting thicker and also braking using a rocket engine three times! No journalist has ever dared to ask Glenn about it! Flying backwards without wings! It had never been done before ... or later. Or ever! It was a show. Glenn never left Earth! However, 04 hours, 36 minutes and 15 seconds after lift off it was time to clear the heat shield for braking in a 34 degrees nose down pitch. Six minutes later the Automatic Steering System detected the beginning of reentry and rolled the capsule at 10 deg/s to stabilize capsule during reentry. Its now - at 4 hours, 42 minutes and 15 seconds after lift off that atmospheric drag braking finally started to slow down the spacecraft. The initial speed must then have been >8.000 m/s. And seven minutes, 17 seconds later - at 4 hours, 49 minutes and 38 seconds after lift off - a drogue parachute was deployed at 6.700 meter altitude slowing descent to 111 m/s and stabilizing capsule. So during 437 seconds the speed was reduced by drag almost 8 000 m/s, i.e. 18.3 m/s² or 2 g! The distance travelled during reentry was about 1.750 km. The fake spacecraft splashed down in the North Atlantic north of Santo Domingo at coordinates near 21°20 N 68°40 W and 21.33°N 68.67°W, 64 km short of the planned landing zone. It was 4 hours, 55 minutes and 30 seconds after lift off. Almost hole-in-one! Retrofire calculations by Ms Katherine Johnson had not taken into account spacecraft weight loss due to use of onboard consumables, we are told. USS "Noa", a destroyer code-named "Steelhead", had spotted the spacecraft when it was descending on its parachute. The destroyer was about 6 miles (9.7 km) away when it radioed Glenn that it would reach him shortly. "Noa" came alongside Friendship 7 seventeen minutes later after a short 20 knots cruise! The Glenn trip never happened, of course, the Mercury Atlas 6 capsule was never in space, it was dropped from a plane from Puerto Rico, but the Commies didn't object, as they never objected to the US a-bomb hoax 1945. It is 75 years old now! The NASA staff incl. JFK in charge knew it was easy to bluff the American public. Just ask Hollywood to assist. They produced the fake a-bombs footage, too! The Americans had some problems later, e.g. that the re-entries of all Apollo Moon trips had to be fake too. Anyway the latter trips never took place either except in a Hollywood studio, the Nevada desert and the Pacific. Maybe you are American and believe in the US space Shuttle (part 2 of this article)? Wasn't it sending totally 100's of people, mostly Americans, up to the International Space Station in the past many, many times? No, it is all fake/invented too! The re-entry of a Shuttle is not possible! Like the Gagarin or Glenn trips. Like all Russian Soyuz capsules' re-entries down from the ISS, now when the Shuttle is scrapped!
1.10 Space shuttles Challenger and Colombia disasters - all fake But haven't 100's of Soviet cosmonauts and American astronauts been sent up into space orbiting Earth and going to the Moon (Americans only) 1961-1991? No, they were mostly military personnel just following orders from above pretending they had been in space or whatever. Basic propaganda. In the military you follow orders ... or get shot. They were all paid to lie! But didn't the space shuttle Challenger disaster occur on January 28, 1986, when the NASA Space Shuttle Challenger (OV-099) (mission STS-51-L) broke apart 73 seconds into the flight, seen live on TV leading to the sad deaths of its seven American crew members many of them civilians? Yes, to improve to space show civilians (sic) were required and in America they were recruited by NASA via ordinary model/photo/advertising agencies. Plenty people were of course willing to dress up in space protective clothing or space suits being photographed and then to become space workers/tourists, etc, etc, blah, blah, being paid for the nonsense. Media would promote them as heroes and they just had to nod and agree to having been up in space doing something. I always wonder how much they were paid. Regarding the space shuttle Challenger January 28, 1986 only an empty light weight mock-up of a Shuttle driven by external rockets was sent up without anybody aboard to impress awed onlookers and it blow up (picture left below) by mistake, in my opinion. What a fuck-up. It should have disappeared behind some clouds and then ... exploded out of sight. But NASA could handle it! They arranged the funerals and re-cycled the un-dead (!) American astronuts as brothers and sisters of the dead or similar. National security, you know! One of the un-dead
American astronuts, Mr. Richard Scobee, got carried
away 25 years later and produced a logo for his
advertising
agency (left)
below: What a cow! Shit
from the sky! But Richard Scobee was just a
low paid part of a big show. 
Human space travel into LEO and to the Moon and sending unmanned spacecrafts to comets, etc, etc are therefore just 50+ years old, silly jokes by stupid people. The smiling American idiots incl. Scobee above and their family relatives are part of the show that can be reached at info@challenger.org . But what about space Shuttle Columbia, STS-107, that was launched from Kennedy Space Center in Florida on January 16, 2003. Didn't it disintegrate over Texas and Louisiana as it re-entered Earth's atmosphere, killing all seven crew members, on February 1, 2003? Well, Shuttle Columbia's flight data recorder was found near Hemphill, Texas, on March 19, 2003, we are told. Six weeks later?! It had survived the crash!!! Unlike commercial jet aircraft, the space Shuttles did not have flight data recorders intended for after-crash analysis. Instead, the vehicle data were transmitted in real time to the ground via telemetry. Since Columbia was the first Shuttle, it had a special flight data OEX (Orbiter EXperiments) recorder, designed to help engineers better understand vehicle performance during the first test flights. After the initial shuttle test-flights were completed, the flight data recorder was never removed from Columbia, and it was still functioning on the crashed flight, if you believe in Santa Claus. It recorded many hundreds of parameters, and contained very extensive logs of structural and other data, which allowed the Columbia Accident Investigation Board to reconstruct many of the events during the process leading to breakup. Investigators could often use the loss of signals from sensors on the wing to track how the damage progressed (!). This was correlated with forensic debris analysis conducted at Lehigh University and other tests to obtain a final conclusion about the probable course of events. One problem is that the special flight data OEX (Orbiter EXperiments) recorder later disappeared. Maybe some souvenir collector stole it? Or the space Shuttle Columbia disaster was also 100% fake/invented. And the only reason to end the US space Shuttle nonsense with civilians flying away. Imagine the amount of work done to invent that last disaster to end a fantasy space program that has cost billions. The NASA space travel staff is really sick. And criminal. And not fun at all. The fake/invented, human space travel industry incl. fake/invented space accidents is however, unfortunately, quite big today. Now NASA and the Russians send other civilians to their International Space (Fake) Station. Read more about it below or join 1 000's of space nuts discussing various matters at http://forum.NASAspaceflight.com/, which is a mix of real spacecraft - small unmanned satellites in LEO - and fantasy projects to the Moon, planet Mars and comets, etc.
1.11 Elon Musk, Manfred Lindinger, Alexander Gerst, Samantha Christoforetti, Andreas Mogensen and Nicola Baumann
1.12 Swedish National Space Board Sweden or
Rymdstyrelsen, i.e. the Swedish
National Space Board
is part of the hoax! The Swedish superstar Christer
Fuglesang
has visited space several times and then made successful
re-entries, we are told. |
