Evan Burton

Greetings, Fellow Travelers,

I'm checking in on a friend's computer.

Let's see how long this stays up.

Charles R. Drago

The fact that Drago can logon on normally from another computer pretty much confirms Andy's explanation that his problems are due to his computer rather than his account. Odd that he seems to think otherwise.

Exactly. Notice he was setting things up exactly as I said - again? If he tried to debate Andy here, he'd pretend his posts were being deleted or he was banned or other nonsense. He can't risk a debate over at the Deep Bull Forum because he can't use his escape clause there.

8-12 March 1969

The LM test phase of the mission successfully completed, the remainder of the flight was relatively low key. The remaining days would be spent conducting the only 'official' experiment of Apollo 9: SO65, otherwise known as the Multispectral Terrain Photography Experiment. This involved the use of multiple Hasselblad cameras taking photographs of the Earth in the visible, infrared and other bands. Different films and filters were also used. This experiment produced hundreds of high quality images, and helped with the development of such satellites as LANDSAT.

The crew also made sightings of other spacecraft, twice optically tracking the Pegasus III (a NASA meteroid detection satellite) at ranges up to 1000 nautical miles, and sighting the ascent stage from Spider late in the mission.

The Service Module's SPS engine was also tested.

The mission complete, the crew made preparations for their return to Earth.

Ditto that three towers fell into their own footprints at near or at free-fall speeds [against all laws of physics] at the WTC.

Wrong.

7 March 1969

Once more, Jim & Rusty donned their pressure suits and went through the connecting tunnel into Spider. Systems were powered up, the tunnel hatch closed and the docking mechanism replaced. Then, at 92 hours and 39 minutes into the mission, the spacecraft undocked. No longer was the callsign “Apollo 9” used; now they were Spider and Gumdrop. The LM slowly backed away from the CSM.

SCOTT (Gumdrop): “That’s a nice looking machine!”

McDIVITT (Spider): “So is yours.”

The two craft flew in formation, the LM staying close until it could be verified that the LM’s rendezvous radar was functioning correctly. Without the radar and associated guidance system, the LM could be lost in orbit, unable to find the Command Module – the only safe way back to Earth. Everything worked as advertised however, and so the LM moved away to simulate the manoeuvres that would take place in orbit around the Moon. Over the next several hours, the Primary Navigation & Guidance System or “Pings” was tested, the LM moving to over 180 km away from Gumdrop. McDivitt and Schweikart also tested the LM staging. On a lunar landing mission, the LM would use the Descent Propulsion System in the descent stage to get the crew safely to the surface of the Moon. When the time came to return to orbit, only the ascent stage would launch, using the descent stage as its launch pad. If a major problem occurred during the landing, the ascent stage would also be used to rapidly return the astronauts to the orbiting CSM.

The jettisoned descent stage remained in orbit for a short time, but eventually re-entered the atmosphere at 0345 GMT on 22 March 1969, impacting in the Indian Ocean off the coast of North Africa. The tests went well, and Spider – minus its bottom half – returned to dock with Gumdrop. An unexpected problem occurred as McDivitt went to dock with Gumdrop: the shiny CM was reflecting sunlight, making it difficult for McDivitt to see!

McDIVITT (Spider): “I just can’t even see the COAS, Dave. I don’t know where you are with respect to it.”

SCOTT (Gumdrop): “Okay – you want me to do it?”

McDIVITT (Spider): “No, let me work my way in here a little closer.”

SCOTT (Gumdrop): “Okay.”

SCHWEIKART (Spider): “Dave, I just can’t see it. Let me get in a little closer”.

SCOTT (Gumdrop): “You’re coming in fine. Just keep coming in easy like that. Looks like you are coming in from an angle, but you are coming in with the right attitude. You ought to go forward and to your right a little bit, relative to your body.”

The COAS was the Crewman Optical Alignment Sight. It generated a light reticule for the crew to use in aligning the LM for docking with the CM. After the experience on Apollo 9, the light intensity was raised so it could be seen against a bright CM.

Eventually, a safe docking was made. Jim and Rusty returned to the CM, sealed the tunnel, and Spider was jettisoned. The work wasn’t over for the LM, though: it was now set up for limited remote control flight. After the CSM backed away, the ascent stage engine was reignited, firing for another 6 minutes, depleting the fuel supply. This placed the ascent stage in an elliptical orbit around the Earth, 3760 nautical miles by 126 nautical miles. It would remain there for 5 years, before burning up in the atmosphere.

The LM had performed well, and NASA now had enough confidence in the Apollo spacecraft to rehearse a lunar landing. The crew of Apollo 9 had now met all the major objectives of the flight. Satisfied with a job well done, they powered down system, ate a meal, and went to sleep.

6 March 1969

The day for Apollo 9 started as per the flight plan: more system tests. Routine, perhaps boring tests... but vital tests to properly flight test LM3.

Conducting these tests inside 'Spider', Rusty appeared to be over his disorientation when - without warning - he suddenly vomited again. Mission commander Jim McDivitt was now concerned. Part of the day's flight plan was for Rusty to conduct an EVA - Extravehicular Activity - transferring from the LM to the CM. It was meant to prove that a crew could transfer between the spacecraft if the CM upper hatch through to the LM could not be opened, and also to prove the EMU - the Extravehicular Mobility Unit - otherwise known as the lunar suit, could protect a person in space. McDivitt, however, could not risk the chance that Rusty would vomit inside his EMU. McDivitt requested a chat with the flight surgeons on a private channel. The success or failure of the mission was on the line.

The flight surgeons discussed the matter with McDivitt, but they left the decision up to him. He decided to wait. Throughout the day they continued with their checks, and Rusty seemed fine. Schweikart did not push the point with his commander, but he wanted Jim to know he felt fine and up to the task.

McDivitt considered and decided that a limited EVA could be undertaken. Rusty could stand out on the LM "porch" to prove the EMU, but he would not conduct a full EVA as planned.

The crew suited up, and the two spacecraft were depressurised. Dave Scott, in the CM, opened the CM hatch and stood up. In the LM, Rusty stood on the LM porch. Each of them had task to perform, recovering special film samples and experiments placed on the outside of the two spacecraft.

The limited EVA achieved most of the planned objectives.

Dave Scott conducts his "stand up EVA" from the Apollo 9 Command Module. This image was taken from the LM "porch". On the right, you can see the hand-hold that Rusty was meant to be using for his full EVA. He would have used these to move from the porch to the CM hatch and back again.

Rusty stands on the porch of Lunar Module "Spider". A better view of the EVA hand-holds.

The EVA lasted for nearly 50 minutes. The crews sealed their spacecraft, and repressurised. Rusty had felt fine throughout the EVA, and the EMU was now rated for use on the lunar surface. The next big test was to prove that Spider, this ungainly and strange looking craft, could actually fly. If it could not, then the entire plan to land on the surface of the Moon would be in ruins.

I am posting this on another forum, but thought some might enjoy it here.

******************

Just in case were not aware, we are coming up to the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 lunar landing.

40 years ago last October, Apollo 7 launched and conducted the first manned flight of the Apollo Command and Service Modules, spending nearly 11 days in space.

40 years last December, Apollo 8 launched - the first manned launch of the Saturn V vehicle. Without a lunar module, they flew to the Moon, went into orbit, and returned safely to Earth, all in just over 6 days.

40 years ago today, Apollo launched into Earth orbit to conduct flight tests of the lunar module. If these tests were successful, the next mission would be a dress rehearsal for a lunar landing. This was also the first Apollo mission to have a callsign apart from Apollo: the spacecraft were called Spider (the LM) and Gumdrop (the CSM). The mission seemed to run into problems when the Lunar Module Pilot, Rusty Schweickart, suffered Space Adaptation Syndrome (space sickness) and had a planned EVA canceled. The following day, however, he recovered and a modified EVA took place. The LM systems were tested, rendezvous practiced, and LM staging proved. 10 days later, the crew returned, the mission was a success, and a manned lunar landing was just around the corner.

******************

3-4 March 1969

Apollo 9 launches into Earth orbit under the command of Jim McDivitt. McDivitt had also commanded Gemini 4, the flight on which Ed White became the first American to walk in space. With McDivitt were Dave Scott (also a Gemini vet, and who would go on to command Apollo 15) as the Command Module Pilot (CMP) and rookie Rusty Schweickart as the Lunar Module Pilot (LMP).

This was only the second manned launch of the Saturn V, and problems still occurred. The flight seemed to be going perfectly until about seven minutes after lift-off, when pogo occurred. Pogo was severe longitudinal vibration that occurred through the launch vehicle. It is caused because various liquids (fuels or oxidisers) are flowing through the stages, causing low frequency vibrations and changing the rate at which the fuel flows. The disturbance in the flow causes slight changes in the rate at which fuel is delivered to the engines, and thus cause slight thrust changes. The effect had been seen in other rockets, but the pogo in the Saturn V could be quite severe (enough to break a fuel line on one flight). Engineers tried to fix the problem, but it was almost random in it's intensity. The pogo was not enough, however to force Apollo 9 to abort.

Once in orbit, the crew took time to adapt to the new environment, learning a lesson from Frank Borman's space sickness on Apollo 8.

Over the next four hours, they eventually docked with the LM, extracted it from the S-IV-B stage, and began their housekeeping for what would become a test pilot's delight of spacecraft evaluation over the next 10 days.

*************

5 March 1969

After a successful launch and extraction of the LM, the crew of Apollo 9 began the business of flight testing the LM.

The LM had been tested - unmanned - in space during previous unmanned Apollo missions but this was the first manned flight test of the LM... and the crew wanted it to succeeded. This mission had always been planned as a flight test of LM3 (the 3rd LM Grumman built) but was originally scheduled as Apollo 8. During the later part of 1968, however, it became apparent that despite Grumman's best efforts the LM would not be ready in time for the flight. It looked as though the Apollo flight schedule would be delayed.. then fate stepped in.

CIA surveillance of the USSR had revealed the existence of the Soviet equivalent of the Saturn V - the N-1 moon rocket. The possibility of the USSR conducting a manned circumlunar flight became very real. Although it would not be a manned landing, the Soviets could rightly claim that they had "reached" the Moon first. George Low of NASA then asked the question: if we're not ready to fly the LM, why not send the CSM around the Moon without it? It was an ambitious call considering it would be the first flight of the Saturn V, but it worked. Although Jim McDivitt was never asked if he wanted fly the new Apollo 8 mission, or remain with his original mission, there was no doubt in his mind: Jim wanted to fly the LM. They has shepherded the spacecraft since it's initial construction, and they didn't want to turn it over to another crew. They therefore became the crew of Apollo 9, rather than Apollo 8.

This had an unexpected and historic side effect: the backup crew for the LM3 flight also switched along with them. This meant they would now become the prime crew for Apollo 12, and not Apollo 11.

Fate just stopped Navy Commander Pete Conrad from being the first man on the Moon.

CDR Jim McDivitt and LMP Russell (Rusty) Schweikart entered the LM for it's first full day of flight testing. They would check system performance, check computers, and check the engines. Everything had to tested before NASA could risk sending a crew to the Moon in a Lunar Module. Even so, the crew of Apollo 9 faced very real - if understated - risk to themselves during the upcoming tests: they would separate into two spacecraft... and only one could return to the Earth. If for some reason the LM and CSM could not redock after separation, the LM crew of McDivitt and Schweikart would have to get as close to the CSM as possible, then make a leap across space to reach the Command Module - there only means of returning to the Earth in one piece.

The crew tested the systems, the checklists, the gauges - all appeared well. Now was time for the first of the more important hurdles: testing the LM's Descent Propulsion System (DPS), the engine that should take the astronauts safely to the lunar surface. This engine was expected to achieve more than previous engines: not only was it expected to stop then restart, it was expected to be throttleable - that is vary it's thrust according to the crew's demands. No engine had ever done this before.

Throughout the day, the crew checked systems. They then fired the DPS - still docked with the CSM - for the first time. The engine did not perform quite as expected, but this was thought to be due to small bubbles in the propellant system. It was cleared by throttling the engine.

The crew also provided live TV broadcasts to Earth, giving viewers a tour of the spacecraft. Things were going well... but the flight plan was about to take an unscheduled deviation.

Unbeknownst to the other crewmembers, Rusty had experienced a sudden bout of nausea when having his breakfast in orbit. The feeling was transient, and he was able to keep the vomit in his mouth until he was able to ejected it into a sick bag. He immediately felt well, and continued with his duties.

As the crew donned their EVA suits prior to entering the LM for it's tests, however, both crewmembers experience disorientation. This passed quickly and the crew continued with the flight plan. Rusty thought that he would adapt quickly, and remained stoic.

The last of the tests involved Rusty activating the LM's "legs", taking them from their stowed position to the landing configuration.

They were now set to separate the two manned spacecraft, one of which could never return to Earth except as a burning hulk - the most hazardous manoeuvre yet attempted by US astronauts.

Preflight crew photo (McDivitt, Scott, Schweikart):

The crew arrangement in the CSM:

Apollo 9 on the launch pad:

The LM still tucked away in the S-IV-B stage, before extraction.

And all those anti-conspiracy theorists and debunkers looking to pick a fight, rant and rave about the threat of conspiracy theorists, especially in these dire economic times, when conspiracy theorists come out of the woodwork, but we still can't find one to debate.

Bill,

I consider myself an "anti-CT" person, even if I believe I am fair and balanced. I am more than happy to debate on the Conspiracy Theory sub-forum, but I do not want to clutter the JFK board with off-topic debate.

I can also point you to off-Forum boards that have numerous debates which you may be interested in participating.

I was out of range of computers when this all happened, but they tell a slightly different tale than the 'official' EF version. I have also found that certain people are targeted more than others to 'conform' to the rules [i.e. they are not applied even-handed, at times]. At the risk of raising the 'ugly head' of yet one more 'breathing together', at times I and others have thought that a loss of energy in the political conspiracies section was just what some were long working toward. I'll not name names. They know who they are. Others do too. Some would like it to be the political anti-conspiracy section. I've long suggested there be one and they can play there in coincidental bliss.

Peter,

I believe that you may be the victim of "disinformation". For instance, I kept records of all e-mails and PMs I sent to people regarding this matter. I would be more than happy to post them - with the other person's permission - to show that certain people were not unfairly targeted, that they were given more than fair and adequate warning, and that the consequences are fully of their own actions and not of any campaign against them. If anything, they received greater latitude than was extended to other members.

Evan

Jan and Magda simply have to abide by the avatar rule - the same rule you and I and Andy and Jack and Daniel and Dawn and all the other people here abide by - and they can post freely.

Their decision, not ours.

Ssssh! Don't bring facts into it. It'll ruin the movie.

I'd say 10% is too great a figure. Perhaps 0.1% would be more accurate (and that's still a guess). Some, however, may reside on this very board. You mentioned JFK and 9/11. Many people here believe both are conspiracies carried out by secret powers or cabals within the US government. Some of those people may believe in alien autopsies, though you'd have to ask them yourself.

On other boards I inhabit, there are people who believe in all three... as well as the Apollo hoax, chemtrails, weather control, etc, etc.

You are just plain wrong on the JFk case. The percentage of Americans who believe it was a conspiracy has always been very high. Way higher than 10%. At one point it was about 70%. And higher in counrties outside the US.

Most people know the alien autopsy stuff was a scam. But this is what anti- conspiarcy folks like you do: lump true conspiracy with lunacy so you can better debunk it all.

Dawn

Dawn,

If you had read my previous post, you would see that I corrected Bill in that I was referring to the percentage of people who believed in all three conspiracies he mentioned (JFK, 9/11, and alien autopsies) and more - in other words, the people who tend to believe almost any conspiracy theory that is put before them. Nowhere have I said that the number of people who believe JFK was subject to a conspiracy was that low; I agree that it could be as high as 70%.

Please don't misquote me. Thanks.

Bill - slight confusion there. You were talking about people who I said tended to believe most all conspiracies they hear about. I would put that group at about 0.1% of a population - and that may be too high. It does NOT refer to the percentage of people who believe JFK was taken down by means other than a lone gunman; I believe the percentage of people who believe that is significantly higher.

I don't want to sidetrack the thread, but the chemtrail stuff is not chemical warfare we know about. These people claim that ordinary contrails we see from jet airliners every day are some type of government plot. Likewise, the weather control is not the type we do know about; it's stuff like that Katrina was caused by the government, etc.

But yes, there are indeed "bizarro" people out there who believe all sorts of things. Souls being transported to Mars, which is actually green and has a atmosphere capable of supporting human life unaided? How about the lady who showed sunlight going through her sprinkler spray, which produced a rainbow. She said it was proof of chemicals in the water supply because it never happened when she was growing up.

Those type of people - very small in number - are the whackos. Just because someone believes in a conspiracy of some type does not make them unstable, unintelligent, stupid, gullible, etc, etc, etc. If you believe everything is a conspiracy, then you need psychiatric help.

I'd say 10% is too great a figure. Perhaps 0.1% would be more accurate (and that's still a guess). Some, however, may reside on this very board. You mentioned JFK and 9/11. Many people here believe both are conspiracies carried out by secret powers or cabals within the US government. Some of those people may believe in alien autopsies, though you'd have to ask them yourself.

On other boards I inhabit, there are people who believe in all three... as well as the Apollo hoax, chemtrails, weather control, etc, etc.

The biggest falacy is that there is a select group of people, like Democrats or Republicans, or liberals or conservatives, who can be defined as "conspiracy theorirsts," as in fact there is no such animal, despite the concerted efforts of people like Colby, Fesser and Tirdad Derakhshani to create them.

I don't quite agree, Bill. I agree that because you identify with a particular group does not mean you automatically believe in all the various theories. Because you believe that 9/11 was an inside job does not mean you believe there is a JFK conspiracy.

I do believe, however, that there are some people who tend to believe most of the conspiracy theories. These people often have nothing in common except their willingness to believe these theories, no matter how seemingly bizarre the theory is. Upbringing, intelligence, social standing, moral beliefs, etc, are not a common denominator and play no part in why this group holds the opinions they do.

I think it is important to distinguish between those involved in a conspiracy and those involved in the cover-up.

Agreed. There is ample evidence of numerous governments covering up details of an event that do not wish to disclose, or that they wish to keep as low key as possible. I daresay that there is not a government on the planet who has not been guilty of this to some degree. Problem is, that is by definition a conspiracy. So yes - important to distinguish between them.

I agree that “if hundreds of people know details of a conspiracy” it is unlikely to be kept quiet. However, if it is in the interest of those in power to keep details of a conspiracy from the public, then it will use aspects of that structure, for example, the media, to cover-up the conspiracy. For example, the role that Operation Mockingbird has played in the assassination of JFK. Of course, the vast majority of those involved in such a cover-up, will have no idea of what really happened. They probably do not have strong feelings about what they are doing. They are just doing their job.

This is not to say I believe in all conspiracies. In fact, I believe in very few of them. In fact, of the major conspiracies suggested by “researchers” only the JFK case is convincing. However, I do believe that acknowledged conspiracies, such as Watergate and Iran-Contra, have only scrapped the surface of really happened and major figures involved in these events remain unpunished.

The problem with most “conspiracy theorists” is that they seem to believe everything is a conspiracy. They even think this forum is part of a conspiracy.

There's the old saying:

"Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead"

Though what you say is correct (some people are just doing their job, etc) the likelihood of the secret being discovered - deliberately or inadvertently - is directly proportional to the number of people who are involved. Someone who knows nothing directly can cause the disclosure of things that others wanted kept secret.

I've said it before, but I simply don't understand why anyone on this forum takes Tom Purvis seriously or respects his ridiculous opinions. He is about the only person I've ever met whose theory is more absurd than the official one.

I agree but he is an expert at taking over threads. It is a shame because this could have been an interesting discussion. Especially, if Evan and Len would have been willing to contribute.

John,

I have to apologise for not contributing to this thread... especially as I was the one who started it. I'll try and make some small amends for that.

I don't agree with everything that was said in the article, but I agree with it overall. I can accept conspiracies that involve few people and are relatively simple to accomplish. I can see JFK possibly fitting in there. A couple of extra gunmen to ensure the task is done. Did LHO actually fire off rounds? I just don't know enough. He could have just been having lunch, as he claimed.

9-11 starts to fall outside the simple area. Could a group have posed as Islamic radicals, recruiting and financing the terrorists who carried out the attacks? Yes.

Could a group have replaced aircraft with missiles, planted demolition charges in buildings, etc? No way.

So this is where I agree with Edward Feser. No huge conspiracies involving hundreds of people, such as the Apollo programme.

There was NO problem with my avatar/photo except in the mind of

vindictive moderators. It was there ALL that time before and NO ONE had a

problem with it. John S himself put it up on the forum and said nothing. He

said nothing when I wrote him asking if it was okay or not. Only Evan

(and maybe Antti) has a problem with it as I was the one who spoke out

and that was my punishment. No one else except for Jack (his biography

link didn't work unknown to him) was treated the same way. Even though David

came out and said it wasn't him in that photo still nothing was done to anyone else.

All the other people with dodgy photos or no photos were not ever dealt with until they were

brought to the attention of the EF moderators by ME and I was busy for days doing that.

Boy, I bet they really loved me by then.

BTW, perhaps Dawn and Magda would both be set straight about Jack's opinion regarding the avatars. From the pinned announcement about avatars:

I suggest this be amended to say IDENTIFIABLE FACIAL PHOTO. This would

rule out a distant photo of a man on a motorcycle or strolling the beach, or any

photo in which the face is not large and well lighted. A face in shadow or

silhouette is not suitable.

Jack

(my bolding)

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=149441

Magda had best blame Jack for her woes, not me.

Paranoid is correct. People like to leave out little facts sometimes.

John S asked us to enforce the rule about avatars. Funnily enough, he even made a post about it and pinned it:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13072

Magda was politely asked - a number of times - to abide by the rules (as you could not see her face clearly). Her response was to place her current avatar up. Petulant little thing, isn't she? After repeated requests and warnings about the avatar, she was placed on moderation.

If Jan wants his account deleted, all he need do is ask John or Andy. No-one is forcing him to have an account here - especially after you said he was banned, and which you yourself subsequently showed was not correct.

Facts are stubborn things.

I took geology in college. I learned about detritus about 60 years ago, I daresay before Mr. Walker was born.

I found it useful in studying the faked Apollo photos when there were discussions of rocks at the bases of moon

"mountains". Mr. Walker thinks that nobody was educated until he came along to roll his eyes.

Jack

Well done. And also thank you for turning a thread in the Education Forum in an educational direction - elementary spelling and the meaning of words. It is a small start at least for this section.

All we need now is the oleaginous one to interject with something pompous about syntax and my cup will be full.

Happy bickering children.

There was a post here a few minutes ago.

Thought police again?

So now CD has been banned. So much for having a debate. So let's see, David, Jan and now CD. Three of the five co-founders of DPF. And I believe Magda was also banned, so that makes four. I rest my case.

Dawn

Dawn,

I think all you have done is demonstrate some of the disinformation and unfounded accusations that can emanate from some of the more infamous members of this forum. Let me explain:

- To the best of my knowledge, Charles has neither been banned nor had any posts on this thread removed.

- To the best of my knowledge, David resigned from the Forum and asked that his account be deleted.

- Jan has not been banned but has an active account. He is under moderation because he refuses to abide the Forum rules regarding avatar photographs.

- Magda has not been banned but has an active account. She is under moderation because she refuses to abide the Forum rules regarding avatar photographs.

I would appreciate it if you would not make unfounded accusations against Forum members.

That what I was thinking, Bill. February is almost over. Did they mean March? Perhaps April? or June....

As I predicted: Charles is too scared to debate Andy on Charles own home ground.

Cowardice, thy name is Drago.

Then Charles will be only too happy to accept Andy's offer to debate at the DPF then, right? That will keep it all above board.

Let's see what Charles does.

He has done nothing of the sort.

Charles was allowed to advertise his forum, and did so.

Charles challenged Andy to a debate, and Andy agreed - to a debate on Charles forum.

It is NOT a matter of "...risking exposure..", IMO. I believe that as soon as Andy shows up Charles in a debate here, Charles will claim it was because of an unfair advantage, interference from mods, whatever.

I believe Andy wants to disarm Charles of that weapon by debating on the DPF, where Charles cannot claim interference. Is Charles too scared to debate Andy on Charles own forum?

Peter:

What exactly did Len say / quote that was wrong?

Thanks.

By Norman Polmar? It's bound to be a good reference, then. I still use his Soviet Naval Developments from time to time.