This is a really popular idea for some reason that comes up often at this point but when you pause and think about it for a second it should quickly become obvious that this requires a bizarre scenario.Capricorn One, June 2, 1978
The company made a little too much money on the life support system. They successfully put faking a Mars landing into play. Even a key U.S. Congressman is involved.
Basically, you just fake the last mile. A real launch, a real lunar orbiting module with live astronauts, simply a unmanned lunar landing with prepared audio and video tape. And yes, you fully plan to “make up” for this with future live landings.
At the point where you have designed a fully functional moon rocket and a fully functional moon lander that is only lacking the human payload capability, it would already be much much much cheaper to just put an astronaut into the equation than to spend the R&D effort you would need to automate all this stuff with 60s tech for no good reason whatsoever.
Not to mention that with 60s tech, you do not reduce the danger of mission failure by removing a human pilot, you are severely increasing it. What good is that perfectly planned hoax going to be when you have to risk it all on that automated lander working perfectly and otherwise need to fake a mission failure in the ultimate exercise of pointlessness? You could just as well have risked everything on a manned lander which eschews the cutting-edge but idiotic moon-landing faking robot for an astronaut or two.
There is simply no point in the development process of the hardware where this decision could plausibly occur.
The only scenario I can imagine off-hand is a conspiracy in which Earth is under quarantine by an alien blockade (every human who tries to leave Early orbit will get shot down but probes won't, for reasons) and the US government knows.