Practice 30 moon landings with a simulator.
Change the gravity setting and successfully do it on the 31st try.
When Neil Armstrong did it, the final approach and landing were done "by the seat of your pants" --- there was no computer used. The de-orbit burn did use a primitive computer. The final approach and landing did not use a computer.
The craft was not flying (no air), it was translating.
There was no aerodynamic stability. - The was no aerodynamics.
When you successfully do it, post a screenshot. :)
Visit landing sites personally. /topic
I have a picture of bigfoot and elvis
Good for you, but, obviously that does not prove that Moon Landings are Real for topic starter. :)
Someone who could fly the Neil Armstrong Challenge
would give it plausibility.
When the trust to official entities is already ruined, that will not work well for those who in doubt. Even third-party proofs will not convince them. Say, if I visit a landing site and post selfies here, they will say it is photoshop. Or if I will not find anything and post selfies here, those who believe in landing will say I just didn't find a site. Only personal expirience could convince them, or prove that they was right.
In any case that does not really matter. Just like it does not matter if Elvis dead or alive, or did Stalin really had a pet wombat or not.
IMO it would be the ultimate test that would be easy to do.
settle it for all
It is definitely possible, but that not be at least cheap to do. So, it has to be financed by some very wealthy entity. But all that wealthy entities are highly discredited now, and whatever they get as result will be questioned.
https://www.flightgear.org/
Recreate Neil Armstrong's landing.
None of the pussies complaining here will try it.
The simulators today are way advance to what Neil Armstrong had.
What is your point?
Just prove it is do-able.
hahah, ya know.. you may just be legit after all.
lmfao.
You cant simulate the missions, because there is no telemetry data... You would only simulate their simulations. But you cant do simulations on the supposed data they collected through the real mission because they "lost the tapes" or "wrote over them" because tape was costly for NASA at the time... lol
And all that raw undeveloped film flew through the van Allen radiation belts and came out perfectly fine.... ok
a real kobayashi maru scenario
flightgear
I have no problem imagining myself making a perfect 3 point landing. prove me wrong.
I think you maybe just do not understand just how robust the craft was and the suits.
6 missions in three years and we never need to ever ever look back again, nothing to see we been there done that.
Who would need a computer to land a easy mode craft like that? it basically drives itself.
Have you ever landed a real plane?
The lunar lander used no computers.
The "suits" don't enter into it.
I am a pilot and have landed planes over 50 years.
You are funny -- go land a real airplane.
GO TRY A LUNAR LANDER
No one has taken this challenge yet.
Pffft, I have flown pretty much every single plane man has created.
I am an ace pilot, I can land anything on anything, I could fly.
I am pretty sure based on this alone, I could fly that ol' lander right thru the eye of the needle.
Look, nothing can compare to the total hours spent in my favorite flight sim.
hahaha, relax bud. I am pretty sure noone can take you up on the moon lander challenge.
The lunar lander was not flying --- no dihedral stability, no terminal velocity limit
It was translating --- not flying.
Now, flying is translating. The measurement of forces against the craft and being in control of reactions to those forces make you a pilot flying a translating craft.
So in my books, if it has velocity and you can steer, it has no wheels, nor friction from dense physical matter then you are flying it.
I would argue that using your logic, we 'fly' submarines under the water.
Small aerodynamic models are often tested in moving water because of the Reynolds number. A vacuum doesn't work.
There is a submarine that "flies down" in the water instead of using ballast.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/03/06/eod.luxury.submarines/index.html
One has air resistance lift/drag/turbulence.
Will a parachute open in a vacuum?
Can you autorotate a lunar lander?
Your quote is so small you ignored the references to the very things you mention.
So again, is underwater movement also flying?
Translation involves moving your location, flying is just a term we associate to air movement but it does not require such forces, as I have already given all that is required to be determined flying.
In other words, if you are piloting a craft and you are in control of vectoring or velocity, you are flying if what you are traverse through is below water resistance. Regardless of what forces work against you.
https://youtu.be/cU6EhQRQGVw?t=10
OH GOD -- you should blow Neil Armstrong out of the window with this advantage that he did not have.
The fine craft and suit protected him from the radiation to this very day.
How can you even suggest he did not have an advantage?
Let's see you goto the moon and back with the suit and craft and live till now.