 Many people (myself included) have found anomalies and inconsistencies in the photos of the Apollo missions on the lunar ground. But the way that the spaceships of Apollo behave in the lunar environment talks still more, and this is a point which is generally completely ignored, included by the hoaxers. Yet, there is much to say about it, like I am going to show in this video, and I don't even need to see the photos taken on the lunar surface to be totally sure that the missions were faked. |
 In order to reach an orbit closer to the moon, from which the powered descent must start (the orbit of the command module is too far from the moon to start the powered descent from it), the lunar module must take a descent orbit toward this closer orbit; this descent orbit is called "Hohmann transfer" (from the name of the German scientist who imagined it), and it is an orbit which, instead of being at a constant distance from the lunar surface, is at a varying distance, and allows to go between two orbits. This maneuver, called "DOI", is described in a document of NASA (nasa-tnd-6846pt.1.pdf). On the point of the orbit of the command module where this descent orbit starts from, the orbital speed of this descent orbit is a little smaller than the orbital speed of the command module; so, in order to put itself on this descent orbit, the lunar module must reduce its speed of the difference between the orbital speed of the command module and the orbital speed of the descent orbit on the point of contact with the orbit of the command module; the NASA document describes this difference as being equal to around 75 feet/s, and what I have myself calculated is close to it. After the lunar module has used its main engine to reduce its speed of this value, it starts to descend on the transfer orbit with its engine off; it naturally glides on this orbit. After the lunar module has reached the closer orbit, after having travelled on half this orbit, it starts using this engine again to perform the powered descent allowing it to land on the moon. At the start of the descent orbit, the lunar module is moving slower than the command module, but, along the descent orbit, it speed is going to progressively increase; however, when it will start to move faster than the command module, it will be very far from it, and out of view from this one.  If the lunar module was not using its engine at the other end of the transfer orbit to start the powered descent, it would continue to follow this orbit, and would move again up to the orbit ot the command module, with its speed progressively decreasing again on this second half.  It is the same type of deorbit maneuver which is used to make the ascent module crash on the moon after it has returned to the command module; with the difference that the decrease of speed to make this deorbit maneuver is more important than the decrease of speed which is made to make the lunar module reach a closer orbit in the initial descent, so that, instead of avoiding the lunar surface, it will meet it instead, but it will hit it almost horizontally (with an angle of only 3.7° relatively to the mean lunar surface as specified in the mission report of Apollo 12).  So, to summarize, after having undocked from the command module, the lunar module briefly uses its engine to decrease its speed of the difference between the orbital speed of the command module and the orbital speed of the descent trajectory, and then it starts to glide down on the descent trajectory with its engine off. It means that the command module should see the lunar module move slower than itself.  This is a sequence which is shown in the video filmed from the command module in Apollo 12, and which shows the lunar module starting its descent toward the lunar surface. We can see the lunar surface move down, which means that the camera is filming in the direction of the move of the command module (if it was filming in the converse direction, we would see the lunar surface move up instead). I have sped up the sequence 10 times, for it better allows to see what is really happening. Initially, we don't see if the lunar module is moving the same as the command module, or moving ahead of it, or lagging behind, for we have no reference to see how it is moving relatively to the command module.  But, at the end of the sequence, we can see the lunar horizon appear on the top of the video, and progressively move down. This means that the lunar module is moving faster than the command module, and the pilot of the command module is turning his camera to continue to follow the lunar module. So, while, in the normal DOI maneuver, the lunar module should reduce it speed, and thus move slower than the command module, it is conversely seen going faster than the command module, which means that there is no way that it can take the descent orbit. This is the main clue, but not the only one; indeed, the pilot of the command module has to turn the camera to continue following the lunar module (which is evidenced by the fact that the lunar horizon moves down on the video); if the pilot of the command module does not turn the camera, then it means that it is the command module which turns so that the camera of the command module will continue following the lunar module.  The fact that the CM turns to follow the LM incorrectly moving ahead of it means that its field of view rotates relatively to the LM. But, if the field of view of the CM rotates relatively to the LM, it also conversely means that the LM rotates relatively to the field of view of the CM.  Now, if I make another animation showing how the LM appears in the reference system of the CM (making that the angle of view of the CM has a fixed orientation in this reference system), we can see that the LM appears turning relatively to the angle of view of the CM.  I have used a 3D model of the lunar module, I have found on the net, that it was possible to make turn, and I have built a set of different views of the lunar module under different angles. I have used this set of views to show how the lunar module would have been seen turning as the camera of the command module is turning to follow the lunar module which is moving ahead of it. It is not perfectly continuous, but the goal is to show how the angle under which the lunar module is seen from the commande module changes as it is moving ahead of the command module (and its size also decreases as it gets farther from the command module). So this sequence is doubly incorrect; first, by incorrectly making the DOI maneuver (that is making the lunar module go faster than the command module instead of making it go slower), and second, by showing the lunar module always under the same angle of view (and the same size), while this angle should change with the difference of angle of view under which the lunar module is seen from the command module as the lunar module is moving ahead of the command module. |
 During the initial phase, the LM is oriented horizontally, because it must use the thrust of its engine to counter the horizontal velocity and make it decrease. Initially, the centrifugal force allows to counter the lunar attraction, which means that it does not need to be countered. Progressively, as the LM loses its horizontal velocity, the centrifugal force decreases, which means that the lunar attraction tends to more and more attract the lunar module toward the moon and make the vertical speed increase. But, during the initial braking phase, the vertical velocity remains small relatively to the important horizontal velocity, and represents only a hundredth of the horizontal velocity, or around it. So, in this phase, the lunar module ignores the lunar attraction and consecrates the thrust of its engine essentially to decrease the important horizontal velocity, which means that it remains horizontal. After this phase, it starts turning to vertical, in order to start countering the lunar attraction before the vertical velocity becomes too important, moderately at first, then more and more as the horizontal velocity becomes smaller and smaller, to end up completely vertical at the end. This change of attitude must be very progressive and can in no way be brutal. When the lunar module is close to the lunar surface, its horizontal speed is very moderate (if it was not, there is no way that the landing could succeed), and the lunar module does not benefit any more of the centrifugal force, and it must counter the lunar attraction with its main engine; if it was turning horizontal at that moment, it would be attracted by the moon and would crash on it. |
 The physics of the ascent is exactly the same for the lunar module, but inverted. It has to turn slowly and regularly from a vertical attitude to a horizontal one, to leave the time to the centrifugal force to grow enough to be able to sustain the lunar module in space. |
 In the powered descent of Apollo 11, we can see the lunar module make an exaggerated pitch which is completely contrary to a normal descent. |
 In Apollo 17 too we can see that the lunar module has a completely wrong attitude just before landing, for, at the last moment, it turns in an very important way, while it should constantly have a vertical attitude when it is close to the lunar surface. |
 The NASA engineers have represented the lunar module moving this way, like a helicopter, but it was obviously intended as a joke. In reality, the flight of the lunar module over the lunar surface has absolutely nothing to do with the flight of a helicopter. |
 When a helicopter moves forward, it bends it main blades, which generates two air forces; the vertical one allows to sustain the helicopter in the air, and the second one allows the horizontal move of the helicopter. The speed that the helicopter is moving forward depends on the slant of the blades (and their rotation speed). When a flying machine want to move in the atmosphere of the earth, it has to provide a push corresponding to the speed it desires to have, and the greater this speed, and the greater the push which is needed, for the resistance of air (drag) increases with the speed. But the air has also the advantage of providing a force which allows to sustain the flying machine in the air (lift). If the flying machine stops providing a horizontal force, its speed will decrease. |
 But, in the void of the moon, there is no air to provide a force which would counter a lateral move of the lunar module; it means that, if the lunar module has a given speed, it will able to maintain this speed without providing a horizontal force. If the lunar module was pitching and was being pushed by its main engine, as there is no force to counter the horizontal move of the lunar module, the lunar module would constantly accelerate, and would very rapidly reach a speed which would be incompatible with looking for a spot to land on. That means that the lunar module can absolutely not behave this way to move over the lunar surface. And also, unlike on earth, the horizontal speed provides no vertical force to sustain the lunar module over the lunar surface, which means that it must contantly provide a vertical force, with its main engine, which is equivalent to the attraction force. When the lunar module pitches, the vertical component of the engine's thrust is smaller than when the lunar module is vertical, which means that the thrust would have to be increased to go on countering the lunar attraction. |
 In fact, when the lunar module is flying over the lunar surface, it must be vertical so that the main engine constanly counters the lunar attraction, and it must move by using its lateral thrusters; even if the lateral thrusters are less powerful than the main engine, as there is no force to counter the lateral move of the lunar module, they are also able to reach any speed; the only difference with the main engine is that they will take more time to reach a given speed, but they will also manage to reach it, whatever this given speed is. In fact, to move in one direction, the corresponding thrusters must be fired, but not permanently. If the lateral thrusters were permanently fired, they would indefinitely accelerate the lunar module, which could reach a very important speed, also incompatible with looking for a spot to land on. |
 The lateral thrusters must only be fired the necessary time to reach the desired speed; once that the desired speed is attained, they must be shut off, otherwise they would continue to accelerate the lunar module. And also, as the acceleration they provide is less than the one provided by the main engine when the LM pitches, it is easier to adjust the desired speed than with the LM pitched. In order to stop the lunar module, the opposite thrusters must be fired, and only the necessary time to stop the lunar module. |
 So, comparing the control of the LM with the one of a helicopter in earth's atmosphere is completely senseless, the physics is radically different. The movies which show the flight of the lunar module over the lunar surface make the same mistake, they make the lunar module move like a helicopter, because they trust what Apollo shows, while in fact the engineers were intending it as a joke, and they knew that it was completely unphysical. If the lunar module was pitching, it would not move at a constant speed like what they show in movies (and that we can also see on videos of Apollo), but it would considerably accelerate and would very fast reach an important speed. Too bad that the movie makers have not been advised by competent aerospace engineers. But, if the lunar module had not behaved in the movies like what is shown on the videos of Apollo, people would have wondered why the movies were making it move differently. |
 On this excerpt of video of the landing of Apollo 11, it is very obvious that the lunar module is pitching before landing, but, in reality, if it was piching that way, its speed would rapidly increase, and it would be totally impossible for it to land; it would tip over when touching the ground for not being stationary relatively to the lunar ground. When Armstrong took the command, the dialog says that he pitched the LM to maintain the ground speed (like he would have done with a helicopter). Pitched to maintain the ground speed! Really? But Armstrong didn't need to pitch the LM to maintain the ground speed, for, as there is not air friction on the moon to slow down the LM, it naturally keeps its current speed. If Armstrong pitches the LM, its speed is not going to remain constant, but it is going to increase very fast, and it will keep increasing as long as the LM is pitched! If Armstrong had really been flying over the lunar surface, he would have seen that the LM's speed, far from remaining constant, was increasing in a very consequent way, and he would have had to stop pitching the LM, and even pitch it the other way to decrease a ground speed which had become too important. But Armstrong has never been flying over the lunar surface, the engineers have made an imaginary Arsmtrong say that, and an imaginary Armstrong who was flying over a fake lunar surface. |
 In the first phase of the ascent, as the LM is going in the direction that the camera is filming, we see it pitch quite abruptly. In fact it should not pitch that way, it should pitch very slowly, regularly. |
 This simplified schematics illustrates what happens when a rocket is launched. I have represented the rocket's thrust with a yellow arrow, the gravity with a red arrow, and the gradually appearing centrifugal force with a green arrow. When a rocket is launched to be put in orbit, it first ascends vertically to extract itself from earth's gravity and gain vertical speed. Then it starts turning to a more horizontal attitude to start gaining horizontal speed, but not brutally, very gradually instead. It first takes a moderate horizontal attitude which allows it to gain horizontal speed. As it is gaining horizontal speed, a centrifugal force starts to appear, and this centrifugal force helps the rocket to counter earth's gravity. So the rocket turns a little more horizontal, which allows it to gain still more horizontal speed; as the horizontal speed increases, so does the centrifugal force, which helps more the rocket to counter earth's attraction, which allows the rocket to turn more horizontal to gain still more horizontal speed, and so on... At the end of the process, the rocket ends in a completely horizontal attitude; its horizontal speed is now the orbital speed which allows to create a centrifugal force which is exactly equal to earth's attraction, which means that the rocket has no more to give a vertical force to counter earth's attraction. The rocket can keep its orbital speed without having to produce a horizontal force, for, in the void, there is no resistance force to slow down the rocket. The rocket can naturally follow its orbit without having to use its engine. The change of attitude of the rocket from vertical to horizontal is very slow, progressive, and regular, it can in no way be brutal. Some Apollo believers have said that the Saturn rocket was behaving that say because the Saturn rocket was flying in earth's atmosphere, but not at all, the physics is the same in both cases; it is just a question of balance between attraction force and centrifugal force. |
 If the rocket, after its initial vertical ascent, was brutally turning to a horizontal attitude, as it has not gained the horizontal speed allowing to produce a centrifugal force which counters earth's attraction, it would start to fall back to earth. As it is falling down, it would gain horizontal speed, but not fast enough to have reached the necessary centrifugal force allowing to counter earth's attraction before it hits the ground. The crash is inevitable. |
 After the pitchover of the lunar module, we see the lunar module start to fall, which is normal, since the lunar module hasn't yet acquired the horizontal speed which would allow to create a centrifugal force compensating the lunar attraction; but, suddenly, this fall mysteriously stops; what is this mysterious force which is stopping the fall of the lunar module, since the centrifugal force allowing to compensate the lunar attraction still doesn't exist? |
 And also the comparison of the videos of the ascent filmed by the camera inside the LM and the rover's camera, synchronized on the lift-off of the lunar module, shows clear differences in the way that the lunar module pitches.  When the lunar module shows a very consistent pitch on the video taken from the camera inside the lunar module, it shows none (or almost) on the video taken from the rover's camera. And, conversely, when the lunar module makes its complete pitchover at the top of the video taken from the rover's camera, the video taken from the camera inside the lunar module shows no evidence of it. |
 In this sequence extracted from a video of Apollo 16, the lunar module is turning around the vertical axis (yawing), because a horizontal thruster is firing at the place I have circled in green, but there should be a second horizontal thruster which should also be firing at the place I have circled in red, otherwise the LM's center is not going to remain immobile, but is going to move instead. |
 In the same video, at several moments we can see a horizontal thruster fire at the place I have circled in red, and this should make the lunar module turn around the vertical axis, but the lunar module does not react to this thruster, it only pitches, that is turns around a horizontal axis, which does not correspond to the action of this horizontal thruster. |
 This schema is extracted from a technical document of NASA and shows how the rendez vous between the lunar module and the command module had to take place. The lunar module arrives under the command module along a parabolic trajectory and a little faster than the command module; it comes from behind the command module, overpasses it, and arrives on the orbit of the command module a little ahead of the latter; it then docks to it. |
 But it is not what we see on, the videos of Apollo. On the videos of Apollo we see the lunar module arrive vertically under the command module. |
 So, instead of following the normal trajectory to make the rendez vous with the command module... |
 On the videos of Apollo the lunar module appears approaching the command module this way, it constantly remains at the vertical of the command module (which leaves the time for the pilot of the command module to admire the lunar module, as Michael collins has said, describing it as a golden insect which was growing and growing). |
 In the following sequence of Apollo 14, we can see the command module turn clockwise as seen from the lunar module. |
 The way that we see the command module turn from the lunar module, it means that the lunar module would make this move relatively to the command module; the lunar module would go over the command module. But why would the lunar module do that? The lunar module has absolutely no ground to do that! In this animation I have represented the full lunar module, but it could as well have been the ascent stage alone. |
 This animation is made with the photos AS14-74-10205 to AS14-74-10210 of Apollo 14. On it we can see the lunar module moving away from the command module after it had undocked from it. But what's weird is that the lunar module, instead of going away normally, wildly turns over in all directions. An Apollo believer had said that it was to allow the pilot of the command module to inspect the lunar module before it starts its descent to the moon. But, in that case, the lunar module would have remained close to the command module while it was turning over, so that it could dock to it again in case of problem. Moreover, when the lunar module is far from the command module, the pilot of the command module can less well see it than if it had remained close to the command module. In other words this maneuver is completely senseless and illogical. |
 This animation is made with the photos AS16-122-19533 to AS16-122-19537 of Apollo 16 (with a varying quality). On it we can see that the lunar module, while it is close to the command module and about to dock to it, takes all the possible orientations, and there is not one which corresponds with the one it should have to dock to the command module. There is absolutely no ground making these useless maneuvers. And don't say that it is to inspect the lunar module, for the lunar module is returning from the moon, it is not going to descend on it. |
 The speed of the command module should not change, for it is its orbital speed (around 6000 km/h). Yet, on this sequence of Apollo 15 (on which I have added a little luminosity), we can see that the speed of the command module relatively to the lunar artefacts changes in a considerable way; the command module slows down very consistently; later it speeds ut up again relatively to the lunar artifacts and slows down again. This is completely incoherent and physically impossible. |
 When the spaceship of Apollo 13 is flying over the moon, it flies in a strange way; instead of flying regularly, we see it make a swaying move; normally it should not sway, for the engine is gimballed, precisely to avoid the swaying move. But it is not exactly a swaying move, it is still more strange: The spaceship alternates sequences in which it moves straight with sequences in which it stops and turns both ways. |
 I illustrate in this animation what we see the spaceship do according to what is filmed by the camera. This is simply impossible, the spaceship can absolutely not behave this way, this is completely unphysical. |
 Later, we can see the lunar surface alternately grow and shrink several times. |
 In short, the spaceship would alternately come closer to the lunar surface and get away from it. But why would the spaceship do this absurd maneuver? When the spaceship follows a regular orbit, it does not have to use its engine; but, in order to make this type of maneuver consisting in alternately coming closer to the lunar surface and getting away from it, it would have to use its engine. The spaceship of Apollo 13 is damaged, and in a precarious state; the only concern of the astronauts and the ground is to take back the astronauts to earth in an as safe way as possible, and it excludes doing any maneuver which would unnecessarily waste propellant. |
 It is absolutely obvious that the only reasonable maneuver was to make the spaceship follow a normal regular orbit around the moon in order to catch the return trajectory to earth. |
 This photo (AS11-37-5445) has been taken in Apollo 11 from the lunar module, and shows the command module orbiting the moon along with the lunar module. Indeed, after the lunar module has separated from the command module, it does not immediately start its descent to the lunar surface, but first orbits the moon close to the command module for some time. The command module is not oriented horizontally like we would expect, but vertically instead, and with the cone of the command module up. We can also see the command module orbit the moon on several videos, and it always appear orbiting with its nozzle facing the lunar surface and the cone of the command module up. |
 If the lunar attraction was constant and the centrifugal force only was varying (because the part closer to the moon has a greater angular speed than the one farther from it), the difference of centrifugal forces would force the command module to take a horizontal attitude when it starts from an attitude in bias. |
 But the lunar attraction also varies with the distance to the moon, and it varies even more than the centrifugal force, for it varies with the inverse of the square of the distance to the moon's center, while the the centrifugal force only varies with the simple inverse of this distance (that's why, the closer to the lunar surface you are, and the greater the orbital speed which is necessary to stay in orbit). Consequently, when the command module is in bias, the lower part has a gravitational force which is a little greater than the centrifugal force, while the upper part has a gravitational force which is conversely a little smaller than the centrifugal force, and this tends to make the command module take a vertical attitude instead. So, if the attitude of the command module is not controlled, it naturally tends to become vertical, so that the center of mass of the spaceship and its geometrical center are vertically aligned, and the center of mass is UNDER the geometrical center; this property is called gravity gradient. |
 We even have a famous satellite, that everybody can see, which has an almost constant attitude relatively to us; it is the MOON. If the moon always shows us the same side and never shows us its hidden side, it would be because the side we see is a little heavier than the side which is hidden to us (which makes that its center of mass does not exactly coincide with its geometrical center, but is distant of some kilometers from it, and closer to us); there is a little variation though, called "libration", which allows us to see a little of the hidden side. |
 Big satellites benefit of a precise attitude control thanks to a reaction wheel (powered by solar cells), controlled with gyroscopes and radio communication. But small satellites often don't benefit of this attitude control, and use the gravity gradient to orient themselves relatively to the earth. The natural attitude corresponding to the repartition of mass of the satellite varies a little, but it remains good enough for the use of uncontrolled small satellites. |
 Some small satellites are able to correct their attitude by changing their repartition of mass (by moving a weight inside them). |
 It is absolutely obvious that the nozzle of the service module's engine was lighter than the rest of the command module. |
 This fact would place the center of mass of the command module above its geometrical center when it is oriented up. But we have seen that the center of mass must be under the geometrical center when the command module orbits the moon. |
 This means that the command module should be oriented down instead when it orbits the moon, so that its center of mass is under its geometrical center, like it must be when the command module orbits the moon. |
 It means that, instead of orbiting the moon this way, with its nose up.... |
 ...The command module should orbit the moon this way instead, with its nose down. |
 Of course, I won't accuse the NASA engineers of incompetence; I know they were perfectly competent. And if they were competent and made all these obvious errors, there can only be one explanation: They intentionally made all these errors to send us a message, and this message could only be that the missions were faked. |
 In fact all those who participated in the hoax were whistleblowers. They all gave very clear hints that the project was faked. All the anomalies which have been found in the photos, and which have been exposed even by professional photographers, are absolutely not blunders of the fakers, who themselves were professionals, but very carefully programmed anomalies that they perfectly knew that experienced photographers would notice them. |
