China is racing to make First Contact with Aliens

August

Metanoia
No ones ever landed there before it should be interesting when it happens. here was a rumour that the Russians had a failed manned landing there ?
 

FFH

Honorable
OK, ill bite :)
If it is that straight forward, why hasn't someone just done exactly that.
I am a believer, but people have been talking about underground bases, Reptilians, tall greys, short greys etc forever. Show me the evidence.
Even a tiny bit of evidence that is remotely credible.
Search your feelings. You know it to be true.
 

Dundee

Fading day by day.
Search your feelings. You know it to be true.
Nice sidestep, but you still didn't answer the question. People talk about the different underground installations and take as fact we are infiltrated by Reptilians and so on. Like I said, I believe we are being visited. However show me a tiny shred of credible, not even evidence. A credible sighting of a so called reptilian.
 

FFH

Honorable
Nice sidestep, but you still didn't answer the question. People talk about the different underground installations and take as fact we are infiltrated by Reptilians and so on. Like I said, I believe we are being visited. However show me a tiny shred of credible, not even evidence. A credible sighting of a so called reptilian.
I got nothing. Gotta go downthere and see for ourselves.
 

nivek

As Above So Below
I got nothing. Gotta go downthere and see for ourselves.

I don't like going too deep underground unless the cavern is really large, it's not because of claustrophobic but more worried about being buried alive, that would be awful...On the other hand, I would take a one way trip to Mars and live there in a small colony...I would volunteer for that...
 

CasualBystander

Celestial
No ones ever landed there before it should be interesting when it happens. here was a rumour that the Russians had a failed manned landing there ?

N1 History (mostly)


N1 launches


N1 trip animation


The N1 had about 30 engines. As far as I can tell, carelessness or sabotage left nuts and bolts in the rocket and at launch they would go through the high pressure turbo-pumps and cause the turbines to tear apart spraying fuel around the bottom of the rocket. You only had to kill one engine to doom the rocket. By the time they got good enough filters and worked out the kinks the project was cancelled.

In theory it could have worked.

As a side note, the Russians have a whole different philosophy than the west. Americans walk the tarmac and pick up every bit of debris from a US military runway.

The SU-27 and other Russian fighters have louvers above the engine for air intake on takeoff and landing and the front scoops are closed off. In theory an SU-27 could take off on dirt.
 
Last edited:

nivek

As Above So Below
As a side note, the Russians have a whole different philosophy than the west.

Indeed, they have a niche for outright lying which seems to have been added to their philisophical repertoire, like the recent one showing a video game screen shot claiming the vehicles were US and Isis forces together...
:lol3:

Screen-Shot-2017-11-14-at-3.51.22-PM.jpg


Russia uses video game footage as ‘irrefutable’ proof that US is aiding ISIS
 

CasualBystander

Celestial
Indeed, they have a niche for outright lying which seems to have been added to their philisophical repertoire, like the recent one showing a video game screen shot claiming the vehicles were US and Isis forces together...
:lol3:

Screen-Shot-2017-11-14-at-3.51.22-PM.jpg


Russia uses video game footage as ‘irrefutable’ proof that US is aiding ISIS

"Sigh", Russia isn't that good at propaganda. But then, they don't have to be.

They only have to fool their natural allies the progressives and they aren't very bright.

It is like fooling your cat or dog, it isn't all that hard.

And if you can't fool your cat or dog, you are probably a progressive.
 
Last edited:

CasualBystander

Celestial
On the propaganda issue...

The French aren't very honest either. Take the Concorde crash. I was going to use this as an example, and found out that what I knew was wrong.

b9d472_9e8654a437784ce5a8d679eabad0b030.webp


The plane wasn't even going down the runway straight - and hit some of the runway lights and ingested hard pieces before it took off. What was screwing up the engines was the landing light pieces.

Wonder why that happened?

Concorde: For the Want of a Spacer

Missing spacer. Just made the bogie wobble when four wheels were good, when one was gone it twisted and had to be dragged sideway (some of the black is skid marks).

But the Concorde should have taken off before it hit the debris. Now why didn't that happen?

Concorde: the unanswered questions
However, more important than this measure is what pilots call the RTOW, the regulated takeoff weight: a limit set according to detailed tables for a given plane in the conditions obtaining at a particular time and place. As Marty released the brake on 25 July last year with the eight-knot wind behind him, the tailwind meant that Concorde's RTOW was just 180 tonnes - at least six tonnes less than the weight of Flight 4590.

Oh, wobbling bogie and 6 tonnes overweight (and out of trim). In fact the reason he crashed is he couldn't trim the plane and had to cut power on the engines he hadn't (against procedure) already shutdown, and he was already below VR.

But still why did he take off 11 knots under VR (188 knots), which was because of the tailwind 19 knots (22 mph) below his real VR?

Well... going through the grass would have been ugly. But he didn't have a choice.

This is the view from the President of France's plane - that was rolling toward the runway.
y7JtZyj.png

Guess where those tire tracks going off the runway would have led?

The pilot viewpoint on the issue:
Untold Story of the Concorde Disaster
 
Last edited:
Top