Faked Moon Landing

[mowque]

What if the Russians had tried to fake a landing. Yes yes, very foolish and stupid but lets say they tried it in 1967 or so, just in time to beat the Americans.

Let us assume NASA figures it out as it happens. How does it go down? Any guesses?

[Aranfan]

They wouldn't do it. Landing on the Moon is something every nation would be able to see. To try and fake it would be to suffer a loss of prestige so great as to effectively cripple them on the world stage.

[mowque]

They wouldn't do it. Landing on the Moon is something every nation would be able to see. To try and fake it would be to suffer a loss of prestige so great as to effectively cripple them on the world stage.

But let us say they tried.

[discovery1]

USSR becomes a laughing stock the world over, loses influence in the third world. Slack taken up by the US and China.

[The Vulture]

Americans do what they can to discredit them.

And to this day, nutjob conspiracy theorists believe the Soviets really did land on the moon.

[Sachyriel]

Americans do what they can to discredit them.

And to this day, nutjob conspiracy theorists believe the Soviets really did land on the moon.

What would Japan look like if the Soviets had invaded? Maybe the free-speech parts would develop a manga just for that.:p

[mowque]

Would it slow down the US program or not? I'm not sure, it could go either way.

[The Kiat]

It wouldn't effect NASA. the CIA would blow the story wide open.

[Astrodragon]

The problem with faking a moon landing is that basically its about as difficult as actually doing it!
The 2 issues which you have to address are that the vehicles in orbit are visible (and in big telescopes enough detail to see what they are), so you have to put that into orbit.
Then you have to put something around the moon, because the orbital part of the lunar lander is again easily visible from earth.
So by the time youve done that, you may as well land anyway!
About the only bit you could fake was the actual landing, but then you have to fake all that video footage and transmit if from lunar orbit (even if its encrypted, the data stream is still visible)

Its easiera nd probably cheaper to actually do the landing!

[Michael Busch]

The problem with faking a moon landing is that basically it's about as difficult as actually doing it!

It is so. Spysats watching the launch site, ground-based radars and optical telescopes tracking the spacecraft in transit, listening in to the com chatter even if it is an encrypted tight-beam, etc. I suppose that you could claim to have stealthed the spacecraft (which is almost impossible to do) - but that would be a pretty stupid ploy.

[Astrodragon]

It is so. Spysats watching the launch site, ground-based radars and optical telescopes tracking the spacecraft in transit, listening in to the com chatter even if it is an encrypted tight-beam, etc. I suppose that you could claim to have stealthed the spacecraft (which is almost impossible to do) - but that would be a pretty stupid ploy.

I dont think you coudl stealth the spaceship against visual - the reason they are shiny is you need to LOSE heat - painting it black would fry the cosmonaughts.

I saw one of the later Apollo craft through a friends telescope (mine wasnt quite big enough). If you knew where to look, they were surprisingly easy to see, especially in moon orbit.

[Thande]

They wouldn't do it. They couldn't launch their N-1 booster and American spy satellites would be able to tell that any rocket launch wasn't big enough to support a moon mission.

They could have used a robotic lander to land laser reflectors (like those put there by the Apollo landers and the later Soviet robotic rovers) and claim those had been put there by manned missions, but I doubt anyone would buy it.

[Municipal Engines]

*Speaks in Russian accent*

"It is small step for comrade and giant leap for comrade-kind."

I never really got the famous 'one small step for man' line that Armstrong did. Don't 'man' and 'mankind' mean the same thing in the plural sense?

[Sachyriel]

*Speaks in Russian accent*

"It is small step for comrade and giant leap for comrade-kind."

I never really got the famous 'one small step for man' line that Armstrong did. Don't 'man' and 'mankind' mean the same thing in the plural sense?

He means one small step for "[a] man" as it's not an especially huge matrix-"jumpfromthisbuildingtothatone"-like step from the lunar module to the moon, but the fac tthat humans are on a natural satellite of the planet they came from for the first time.

[Thande]

He means one small step for "[a] man" as it's not an especially huge matrix-"jumpfromthisbuildingtothatone"-like step from the lunar module to the moon, but the fac tthat humans are on a natural satellite of the planet they came from for the first time.

Yes. Bear in mind Armstrong fluffed his lines because he missed out the 'a'.

[corditeman]

:p Telemetry from the Moon would be difficult to fake. A recent examination of 'Apollo never landed' theories thoroughly debunked them. The concept this thread started with is simply the theory reversed.

One big problem with a fake would be the 'rocket's red glare' or rather its brightening as it lifted off the Moon.

It might have been possible for Russia to have launched two boosters to an Earth-Orbit-Rendezvous, carrying a lander and a lunar transfer booster, then rendezvous'd on return to EOR with a Soyuz for re-entry. Complex, but it might just have beaten Apollo.

[mowque]

:p Telemetry from the Moon would be difficult to fake. A recent examination of 'Apollo never landed' theories thoroughly debunked them. The concept this thread started with is simply the theory reversed..

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, so don't go that route. Just merely asking a What If.

[Custard Cream Monster]

In western minds, the tapes for the Soviet national anthem and the Benny Hill music would be switched over. They wouldn't be able to sell them a dummy. I'd think of it as something several times more embarrassing than the U2 incident, apart from more of a case of being laughed at rather than having one's hand caught in the biscuit tin.

[ninebucks]

Would Western telescopes be powerful enough to see individual cosmonauts on the surface of the moon? If not, the Soviets could have just sent up an unmanned craft and faked the moonwalking somewhere on Earth.

But yes, the fraud would quickly be discovered, and the USSR would be humiliated. The American space program would be emboldened by the Soviet failure, with more ambitious moon projects being planned to rub the Russians' noses in their failure.

The only way the Soviets could escape the ridicule would be to actually launch a real manned moon mission.

So the effects would ultimately be a continued space race. And unlike OTL, where the finish line of the race was a manned moon landing, the finish line of TTL's race would be the establishment of a permanent moon base.

[Sachyriel]

Yes. Bear in mind Armstrong fluffed his lines because he missed out the 'a'.

Nah, it sounds better this way. A flaw in the speech, a flawed man. A great achievement. Just like humanity.:)

[BlackWave]

Yes. Bear in mind Armstrong fluffed his lines because he missed out the 'a'.

Wasn't it a problem with the transmission? I remember reading that it was distorted by static or something.

[Mark E.]

Would Western telescopes be powerful enough to see individual cosmonauts on the surface of the moon?

No. No earthbound telescope has the resolution to discern objects as small as a lunar lander. Not until the LRO began sending back photos this year did we see any pictures of the Apollo landing sites since the astronauts left.

[Astrodragon]

No. No earthbound telescope has the resolution to discern objects as small as a lunar lander. Not until the LRO began sending back photos this year did we see any pictures of the Apollo landing sites since the astronauts left.

I never said the lunar lander, I said the orbiter. In sunlight, it is inded fairly easy to spot (its easier to see it in lunar orbit as you know where to look for it, spotting it between the earth and moon is indeed hard...

The orbiter 'pops out' as it clears the shadown and gets illuminated, which helps immensely.

[Astrodragon]

Would Western telescopes be powerful enough to see individual cosmonauts on the surface of the moon? If not, the Soviets could have just sent up an unmanned craft and faked the moonwalking somewhere on Earth.

But yes, the fraud would quickly be discovered, and the USSR would be humiliated. The American space program would be emboldened by the Soviet failure, with more ambitious moon projects being planned to rub the Russians' noses in their failure.

The only way the Soviets could escape the ridicule would be to actually launch a real manned moon mission.

So the effects would ultimately be a continued space race. And unlike OTL, where the finish line of the race was a manned moon landing, the finish line of TTL's race would be the establishment of a permanent moon base.

Sadly not.
The practical resolution for an earth-based scope at the time was about a km.

The lander also is too small. Theoretically the takeoff flare would be visible, but this means taking off in dark, and even then its iffy.
The section orbiting the moon is quite easy to see, its a big chunk of shiny metal thats illuminated by the sun when it comes around the curve of the moon..
I'm not sure if it would be possible to spot the separation of the lander from the orbiter....a lot depends on when it happens, if its in 'front' of the moon, dark or light moon background...all sorts of things.

[Michael Busch]

Would Western telescopes be powerful enough to see individual cosmonauts on the surface of the moon? If not, the Soviets could have just sent up an unmanned craft and faked the moonwalking somewhere on Earth.

Not with anything that was available in the 1970's. But there are two problems with that:

1. The size of the spacecraft during launch, cruise, lunar orbit, landing, takeoff, and return to Earth - both in volume and mass. It has to be plausible for the crew they say it had and whatever samples they are supposed to have obtained. That basically requires a human mission in the first place.

2. Telemetry from the surface can be intercepted by anyone who cares to listen. Yes, it can be encrypted, but the data volume etc. has to match again. If it isn't encrypted - which is what you want for the big publicity value of a live video of a cosmonaut - you have to have everything pre-recorded and played back and there will be unavoidable problems (things going too smoothly or too badly, lunar dust not acting the way it actually does, the landscape not matching the real topography of the landing site, etc.).

So - pretty much impossible to do.

[cbrunish]

But wouldn't be interesting if the USA really did land on the moon???????:D:D:D