ApolloInvestigation

This video shows that the 1202 alarm which happened in the descent of Apollo 11 had nothing with data received by the rendezvous radar, but had a purely internal cause, and that it could have been avoided with a hardware modification. But it also shows that the management of the rendezvous radar by the AGC always ends with an abort, whatever the circumstances. Link to the mission report of Apollo 11 (contains the description of the 1202 alarm): https://www.nasa.gov/specials/apollo50th/pdf/A11_MissionReport.pdf Link to the programs of the AGC: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/listings/LUM99R2/MAIN.agc.html Link to the description of the instructions of the AGC: http://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/assembly_language_manual.html#The_Interpreter_vs._the_CPU Link to the description of the communication channels between the AGC and the LGC: https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/blob/master/Luminary099/INPUT_OUTPUT_CHANNEL_BIT_DESCRIPTIONS.agc

This video shows problems with the rover in Apollo 17, and also more general problems. Link to the mission report of Apollo 17 https://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/A17_MissionReport.pdf Link to the gallery of photos of Apollo http://apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html Link to the library of videos of Apollo 17 https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/video17.html Link to the technical document of the lunar rover: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LRV_OpsNAS8-25145.pdf

The IMU was essential for the navigation of the lunar module. Indeed, it was containing the gyroscopes and accelerometers which were respectively allowing to update angles and speeds, which were used for the update of the navigation. But, on the communication channels between the AGC and the LGC, there is nothing which allows the AGC to read the information of the IMU. None of the programs of the AGC which are supposed to deal with the IMU tries to exploit the information of the IMU. Two programs are supposed to make performance tests on the IMU, but, if these programs read a timer supposed to time this performance, in fact they don't really use this timer to make this test, for nothing is read from the IMU. And a program also supposed to deal with the IMU only reads a channel which has nothing to do with the IMU, and which is in fact an output channel which contains the commands to set the main engine on and off. The reality is that the lunar module had no possibility of exploiting the information sent by the IMU, and thence could not correctly update the navigation, which anyway does not matter much, as we have seen in previous videos that the the lunar module could not control the thrust of the descent engine, and neither the lateral thrusters of the RCS. Link to the programs of the AGC: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/listings/LUM99R2/MAIN.agc.html Link to the description of the instructions of the AGC: http://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/assembly_language_manual.html#The_Interpreter_vs._the_CPU Link to the description of the communication channels between the AGC and the LGC: https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/blob/master/Luminary099/INPUT_OUTPUT_CHANNEL_BIT_DESCRIPTIONS.agc

This video shows several anomalies in the descent of Apollo 12 on the moon..and beyond! Link to the video of the descent of Apollo 12: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFSa6vUix70&t=611s Link to the mission report of Apollo 12: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/A12_MissionReport.pdf

Curious Marc asserts to have to restored the AGC and to be able to make it work. He connects the AGC to a modern computer and pretends to read the guidance program on it, and to make it work on the modern computer. The problem is that he has not really connected to the memory of the AGC, but to its display commands instead, and that does not allow him to read the programs of the AGC. Moreover the guidance program of the AGC cannot work without its normal environment, and, even if Curious Marc has connected an accelerometer to his computer, this accelerometer gives in fact no information for it is static, and it only gives information which it is in a body which moves. The program that Curious Marc shows on the modern computer is not at all the original guidance program of the AGC, but a simulation program which has been made by a computer geek. Link to the technical description of the lunar module: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM10HandbookVol1.pdf Link to the technical description of the AGC: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/hrst/archive/1029.pdf Link to the description of the DSKY: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/hrst/archive/1020.pdf Link to my analysis of the memory of the AGC: http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/AGC/AGCMemory.HTM

This video shows that the AGC was incapable of controlling both the thrust and the direction of the thrust of the main engine of the lunar module, thus making the descent on the moon impossible. Link to the hand manual of the lunar module: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM10HandbookVol1.pdf

This video shows various problems about the AGC, the way it was working. Links to the mission reports: https://www.nasa.gov/specials/apollo50th/pdf/A11_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/A12_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a13/A13_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a14/A14_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/ap15mr.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/A16_MissionReport.pdf https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap17fj/pdf/a17_mission-report.pdf

This video shows many anomalies, incompatibilities, that we can see in the reflection of the visor of the astronauts of Apollo. Link to the photos of Apollo in the Apollo lunar surface journal: http://apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html

This video shows serious problems about the antennas of the space ships of Apollo (command module and lunar module), which make doubt that they could be used to make the moon missions. Link to the mission reports: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a410/A08_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a410/A09_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a410/A10_MissionReport.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/specials/apollo50th/pdf/A11_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/A12_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a13/A13_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a14/A14_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/ap15mr.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/A16_MissionReport.pdf https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap17fj/pdf/a17_mission-report.pdf

After having shown in the previous video that the powered ascent of the lunar module was senseless, I now show in this new video that the maneuvers of the lunar module to join the command module make no more sense. Link to the description of the return of the lunar module to the command module: https://history.nasa.gov/afj/loressay.html

This video shows that there is a succession of problems in the ascent of the lunar module in Apollo 17, which totally discredit it. Link to the article in which Ed Fendell explains how he controlled the TV camera of the lunar rover: https://www.universetoday.com/117331/how-nasa-filmed-humans-last-leaving-the-moon-42-years-ago/ Link to the document which describes the descent of the lunar module on the moon, and the lift-off from it: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/nasa-tnd-6846pt.1.pdf

This video shows that the flag of Apollo 17, although it is supposed to absolutely not move after it has been stilled by the astronaut, obviously shows changes of orientation and aspect. Link to the Apollo lunar surface journal which gives access to all the photos of Apollo: http://apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html

Generally, only the footage is taken into account in the discussion of the moon hoax. When the media talk about the moon hoax, they exclusively talk about problems in photos and videos, and think they have the answer to these problems. In fact there are many more anomalies in the footage than the ones the media are talking about, but the media seem to completely ignore them. The moon hoaxers only criticize the footage and hardly talk about the technology. When the technology is considered, it is only to say that the computer of Apollo had a power well below the one of the current computers; the Apollo believers respond to this argument by saying that most of the computations were done by computers on earth, and that the computer of the lunar module only had a minimum of work to do that it was fit for; and this computer was not intended to play video games on. However the computer still had to make the guidance of the spaceship, for it was something that the computers on earth could not do, at least not as well as the onboard computer, because of the communication time between the moon and the earth. Since this was a fresh new territory to explore, I got interested into the technology of the lunar module, and I have read many technical documents on Apollo written by NASA engineers, including the hand manual of the lunar module. What I have discovered was really awesome; I have found that: - The computer of the lunar module (and of the command module) could not work at all, so there is no point comparing it with current computers; on the other hand, the (IBM) computer of the saturn rocket was a normal computer which could really work, but of course with the performances of its time. - The commande interface of the lateral jets (RCS) could not work, which means that, even if the computer had worked, it could not anyway have maneuvered the lunar module. - The radar could not work - The communication system could not work - The powered descent was abnormal - The landing procedure was illogical and aberrant - And the survival equipment of the astronauts was dangerous to use And even the technical documents describing the technology of the lunar rover and the ALSEP were showing they could not work. In other words, NASA would have landed on the moon with a technology which was not working at all. And it was entirely intentional, which shows that the whistleblowers were not only among those who faked the footage, but also the engineers who were in charge of faking the technology of the lunar module.

This video talks about the debunking of jack White's study which has been made by an Apolo fan who is a friend of Clavius. The author of the debunking explains that the photos that Jack White shows (in Apollo 17), and with which he has made a panoramic, just show that the photographer has turned around the lem and not that the lem had been moved. I show with views from above that the angles of view of the lem on the two photos are incompatible, given the way the photographer had to turn his camera to take the second photo, what the debunker has admitted in his debunking. So, if the two photos don't give the evidence that the lem has been moved on the two photo, they at least give the evidence that the lem has been turned.

This video shows that, in Apollo 15, the position and orientation of the lunar module and the flag in two different photos are incompatible.

There are several anomalies which make doubt that Armstrong has really been filmed on the moon: 1) While the camera is obviously turned, the lunar module and Armstrong do not appear turned. 2) There are serious doubts about the presence of the MESA which contains the television camera. 3) The S-Band antenna which transmits the television signal to the earth is obviously not oriented toward the earth like it should be. 4) And finally, between two consecutive photos of Apollo 11, the earth abnormally moves.

The Media show no doubt about the Apollo moon landings, and always display the same simplistic arguments to support them. They think that they have completely debunked the moon hoax, like the moon hoaxers had no other arguments to put forward, and should admit their defeat. They assimilate the moon hoaxers with flat-earthers, and consider the moon hoax as insane as the stupid flat-earth. The big problem is that the real arguments of the moon hoaxers are completey ignored, and this is the main reason why the moon hoax is so much despised and mocked at. This film shows that there really are solid reasons to doubt the moon landings, which have absolutely nothing to do with the arguments used to justify the flat earth. It is not true that it was harmless for the astronauts to go through the Van Allen belts, and that they could also stand the radiations outside these belts. It is not true that the lunar module could easily land on the the moon, and that the problems which occurred in some missions were just trivial problems which could easily be overcome. It is not true that it was no problem for the astronauts to survive on the moon during the time they spent on it. It is not true that the return of the lunar module to the command module was easy to do. It is not true that the computer of the lunar module was able to handle all the problems of the difficult descent on the lunar surface. This film shows many problems which are completely hidden to many people, and it is the knowledge of these problems which can completely change their vision of Apollo, and show them that things are not as easy as what is presented to them. Here are some reference documents which have been used to make this study: - The description of the travel of the command module to the moon: https://history.nasa.gov/afj/launchwindow/lw1.html - The technical description of the lunar module: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM10HandbookVol1.pdf - A full list of technical documents about Apollo: http://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/links.html - The full listings of the AGC: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/listings/LUM99R2/MAIN.agc.html - The description of the instruction set of the AGC: http://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/assembly_language_manual.html#The_Interpreter_vs._the_CPU - The missions reports of Apollo: https://www.nasa.gov/specials/apollo50th/pdf/A11_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/A12_MissionReport.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a13/A13_MissionReport.pdf https://history.nasa.gov/afj/ap14fj/pdf/a14_mission-report.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/ap15mr.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/A16_MissionReport.pdf https://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/A17_MissionReport.pdf Photos of the missions: http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html Video libraries of Apollo: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a11/video11.html https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a12/video12.html https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a14/video14.html https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a15/video15.html https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/video16.html https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a17/video17.html Links about Von Braun: https://www.thelocal.de/20110510/34917 https://books.google.fr/books?id=61raDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT141&lpg=PT141&dq=Paul+Schr%C3%B6der+Peenemunde&source=bl&ots=oW1QMq3dV4&sig=ACfU3U0vgyOQIxq8eeaiwmjsSaHMELKAZA&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiWyu-S3KfqAhUJrxoKHfhyCrsQ6AEwC3oECA0QAQ#v=onepage&q=Paul%20Schr%C3%B6der%20Peenemunde&f=false Personal studies: Study of the travel to and from the moon: http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/ImprobableTravel/ImprobableTravel.HTM Study of the moon rocks of Apollo : http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/MoonRocks/MoonRocks.HTM Study of the retro-reflector of Apollo: http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/ApolloReflectors/ApolloReflectors.HTM Study of photos of the LRO: http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/LROHoax.HTM Study of the earth of Apollo: https://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/ApolloEarth/ApolloEarth.HTM Study of the sun of Apollo: https://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/ApolloSun/ApolloSun.HTM Study of the delay of communication: https://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/TransmissionDelay/TransmissionDelay.HTM Study of the radiotelescope of Jodrell bank: https://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/JodrellRadar/JodrellRadar.HTM Study of the system of propulsion of the lunar module: https://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/ApolloPropulsion/ApolloPropulsion.HTM Study of the ascent of the lunar module: https://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/LunarModuleAscent/LunarModuleAscent.HTM And, to show how far the moon hoaxer could go to study the technology of Apollo, here are very technical links: Study of the Apollo guidance computer: https://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/AGC/AGC.HTM Study of the electronic interfaces of Apollo: https://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/ApolloSystems/ApolloSystems.HTM

In Apollo 16, there has been a famous ride of the rover a little before the close-out of first EVA, that they called "grand prix". This ride has been used by the Apollo believers to prove that the dust which falls before the wheels of the rover could only fall on the moon, which can easily be proven false (a buggy on earth can produce the same type of parabolic fall of the dust); moreover this dust behaves in a strange manner, which shows that it is not naturally produced. But this video is not about the fall of the dust, but about some other facts. First, there is a preliminary ride before the grand prix, during which photos are taken, and these photos show that the rover would have inexplicably made very important changes of direction all along the ride, while it was supposed to go straight, or almost. Then, when the rover is about to turn back during the grand prix, it appears to be very close to the LM on the video, while it did not ride farther than 70 meters, and the LM was supposed to be 800 meters away; the LM should have appeared farther in the background, and also smaller. And, finally, the LM looks completely abnormal; and it is not simply a feeling, I can prove it by giving a strong hint (the oversized rendezvous antenna). Link to the dialog of the grand prix in the video library of Apollo 16: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/a16.trvlm1.html#1245810

Unlike the computer of the lunar module, the so called AGC, the IBM computer of the Saturn rocket was a serious computer, which could actually work. Of course, it had the performances of its time, and could not be compared with the current computers both in terms of power and memory, but it was perfectly suited for the relatively simple work it had to do (there was not even even a human interface). I have seen many documentations of computers, and the one of the computer of the Saturn rocket has looked perfectly normal to me, nothing suspect, unlike the one of the AGC which was the weirdest I have ever seen, with instructions which should not even existed (like the so called "hidden" instructions), unpractical instructions, a poor set of branch instructions... NASA has produced a document in which the engineers have shown a bench of tests comparing the IBM computer of the Saturn rocket with the AGC, and supposing to show that the AGC was superior to the AGC...The only problem is that all these tests are complete meaningless jokes. How could a computer which could not even have added one and one have been superior to a normal computer which was actually working? if the Saturn rocket had been controlled by the AGC instead of the IBM computer, there is a complete certitude that it would have crashed shortly have having lifted off. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWMdIJKxHCI Link to the technical document describing this critique: http://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/Documents/CritiqueOfIBMApolloStudyReport.pdf

CuriousMarc has made several videos in which he claims that he has restored the AGC, that he has made it work again. But, in fact, it is nothing but an illusion, for: 1) CuriousMark has not connected the memory modules to the modern computer, but signals which allow to drive the luminous indications of the DSKY, the 7-Segments, and the luminous indicators, and these signals do not allow to read the memory of the AGC. 2) The program he makes run on the modern computer has absolutely nothing to do with what the original program would do (supposing it could actually work), for it does not use the devices that the original AGC was using, it uses no radar, and no gyroscopes, and, even if CuriousMarc claims to have connected accelerometers to the modern computer, these accelerometers always give the same information, and so are irrelevant; CuriousMarc uses the handcontroller even in the phases of the descent in which the AGC exclusively had the control of the lunar module, which means that actions that the astronauts could have made on the handcontroller in these phases would have had no effect at that moment; the program is nothing else but a simulation, a sort of video game, which has absolutely nothing to do with the original program of the AGC (or what it was supposed to be). In fact, CuriousMarc has absolutely no clue, he randomly picks signals from the AGC, shows them on a scope, but he does not really know their function. And, even if CuriousMarc could really have read the memory of the AGC, what he would have read would have been inconsistent, for, the way that this memory is described in the documentation of the AGC, this memory could simply not work, and I explain why in detail in this document: http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/AGC/AGCMemory.HTM Link to the technical description of the lunar module: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM10HandbookVol1.pdf Link to the technical description of the AGC: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/hrst/archive/1029.pdf Link to the description of the DSKY: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/hrst/archive/1020.pdf

This video is based on a document I have found in the Virtual AGC Home Page, and which deals with the guidance program of the AGC. Here is its link: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/Documents/HSI-208616.pdf The video shows that this document contains plenty of aberrations which obviously are intentional, and intended to show that the guidance program was a fantasy and never allowed a lunar module to land on the moon. I also give the link to the technical manual of the lunar module published by GRUMMAN; you'll find the description of the system of propulsion of the lunar module in it. http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM10HandbookVol1.pdf I also have made a HTML page with the contents of this video and uploaded it on my site; here is its link: http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/AGCProgram/AGCProgram.HTM I also explain in a HTML page why the memory of the AGC had been mounted in such a way that it could not work; here is its link: http://www.angelfire.com/moon2/xpascal/MoonHoax/AGC/AGCMemory.HTM So, you can see that the problems of Apollo go much beyond the problems which can be found in the footage.

This video shows that it makes no sense that the astronaut would have taken the control of the thrust with the handcontroller when the lunar module was flying over the lunar surface, for this control is too difficult to be left to the astronaut. Link to the technical manual of the lunar module (which describes the systems of the lunar module, and in particular the system of propulsion): http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM10HandbookVol1.pdf

In this video, I analyze the code which allows the AGC to process an abort; I show that this program is full of useless instructions, and even contains illegal instructions. Moreover, all this program does is to switch from the descent program to the ascent program, it does not prevent the separation of stages from being done, for in fact the ABORT STAGE button directly triggers the separation of stages, without the AGC having any way to prevent it. And, if the AGC does not switch to the ascent program when the separation is done, it makes things still worse instead of making them better, for the ascent stage cannot be maneuvered if it is controlled with the descent program. Link to the source code of the abort process in the AGC: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/listings/LUM99R2/P70-P71.agc.html https://github.com/chrislgarry/Apollo-11/blob/master/Luminary099/INPUT_OUTPUT_CHANNEL_BIT_DESCRIPTIONS.agc Link to the handbook of the lunar module: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM10HandbookVol1.pdf Link to the operating manual of the AGS: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/Pultorak_files/FP6_OperatingManual.pdf

This video shows problems in the ascent program of the AGC. First the program does not control the lateral thrusters, which removes any credibility from it. Then I show that this program is stuffed with errors, redundancies, and absurdities. Finally this program makes calls to the display which slow it down at such point that it should rapidly overload the computer, creating the same problem as in the descent of Apollo 11, that is display the 1202 alarm. Link to the program of the ascent routine https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/listings/LUM99R2/ASCENT_GUIDANCE.agc.html Link to the technical manual of the lunar module: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM10HandbookVol1.pdf

The logical command interface of the RCS (lateral thrusters) was controlled with 3 commands of rotation, either positive or negative, and 3 commands of translation, either positive or negative. So there should have been a channel with 12 bits to send commands to this interface. Instead of that, there are two channels, with 8 bits each, to send commands to the RCS, so which in fact are theoretically able to individually control the 16 thrusters of the RCS; in reality the LGC does not allow to individually control the thrusters of the RCS, so these commands cannot be used. Moreover, the program which controls the attitude of the lunar module does not even write into these channels, it does plenty of calculations which are completely useless, as it does not send the result of these calculations to the LGC. And many of the instructions which are used in this program are even illegal (two macro-instructions on the same line). And the cherry on the cake is that each vertical command activates two vertical thrusters directly opposed to each other on the same cluster, which thus mutually cancel these respective effects. So, while we have already seen that the AGC was not able to control the thrust of the main engine, we now see that it is no more able to control the lateral thrusters of the RCS, which was making both the powered descent and the powered ascent impossible. Nobody ever walked on the moon. Link to the hand manual of the lunar module: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM10HandbookVol1.pdf Link to the program of the control of attitude of the lunar module: https://www.ibiblio.org/apollo/listings/LUM99R2/ATTITUDE_MANEUVER_ROUTINE.agc.html