Japanese lunar lander weird orbit

Im new on this forum. I was researching concave earth/sky centrism through 10 years. But still don’t understand few things especially physics of orbiting everything inside.

So few weeks ago Japanese lunar “lander” had to land on the moon. But what was weird it’s orbit.

On right side is skycentrism model blue line is orbit of ship, grey is moon.

On the left this white line i drawned to show how in my opinion it should looks. In every space simulator it would look like that. There is no any reason to fly 1.5 million kilometers beyond the moon only for take his orbit.
Explanation in wiki is “In an effort to conserve fuel, the mission used a slower path to approach the Moon, entering [lunar orbit]”
How can they save fuel bringing lander on 1.5 million km altitude instead of 400 000km? At “Mission 1 Lander” sign, ship just accelerating, they just explained that is gravity of the sun. They didn’t explained did ship used any thrust or not. But what next. When ship enter moon orbit it has to slow down, because apoge will be on 1.5 million km and perygeum around 400 000, so ship has to use fuel again, but they were explaining they are using this long orbit to save fuel…
So i made some tries in kerbal space program and i didn’t noticed anything of that. I used trajectory of white line which i drawned and it was most effective way of fuel usage.

But now. When on yt was stream from landing. Of course there wasn’t any onboard cam. And what was more interesting it was looks like this “Command center” didn’t had any cam too. So where is real command center? These people in front of monitors watching only animations and charts.

And now 4mins part (103) HAKUTO-R M1 Moon landing - YouTube

Is it only my feel or i think that they are acting there? They really want people to feel emotions. I think is typical tactic when someone giving sign to one guy where start to clapping and the rest starting too. But this is so unnatural.

Ok but in the fact they showed two photos. But how we know on wchich altitude lander is and how big moon is? It’s impossible to measure it from photo. Even all Apollo misions photos and record doesn’t tell anything They were setted cams perfectly not to show everything.

Here’s how I think it works

They have a department that makes the simulations that the engineers practice on before they do the actual launch. The simulations take the same inputs that the engineers use when they do it live and it generates the animation that everyone watches in the control room. This is not a Japan only thing, all space programs do it this way. India, China, Japan, SpaceX, they all watch only animation like this without exception.

So from the control room’s perspective it is real. The people who worked on the Apollo missions have said there is no way to tell the difference between the simulation and the real thing. But we know there is no “real thing” right?

The upper level administrators all know these are just exercises as well as the CAPCOM is “in on it to”. He/she provides the verbal cues to lead the rest of the control room through the charade because they are either reading from a script or someone has a bug in their ear and is directing them along.

Any lunar landing is fake, period.

I don’t think it is fake. You showing video on channel with 1,89 mln subscribers, i’m curious how YT didn’t removed this info and channel yet if it hits in NASA agency. Because many channels has been deleted because of talking bad about gonvorment. And I see in this vid how guy telling you how u have to think about this what someone told about landing and leadie is trying to be mind of people who watching this. Typical TV brainwash.

But back to the oon hoax theories. There are mirrors on the moon which were placed with apollo landings. This is proof.

But what is funny in thes moon hoax theories is that they completly covering NASA. They didnt even showed orbit time they didnt showed anything. There is no any vid or phot which could be proof for official moon size. And noone thinks this way. Why? Because it coudl proofs small size of the moon like 100km diameter. But fla earthers and all moon hoaxers doesont want that. Why? Because they are payed dumb hoaxers without any logic. So it’s much better for government to cover whole media with stupid nobrain theories like moon fake, or nasa fake or ISS in water etc. Now everyone will laugh. This is easiest way to hide the real evidence.

Buzz Aldrin, second man to “walk on the moon” coming clean.

So when NASA says “we landed on the moon” this is lie but when NASA astronaut says we didn’t landed on the moon it’s not lie right? What a naive thinking.
By the way he didn’t told they didnt landed. He told money was reason why they stopped. But i think one reason is that moon is too small.

How did the camera man get there first to film it?
How could the camera man survive in outer space?

Now some other fakery. You know it’s true because it happened 73 sec. into the flight.

It’s funny how you try change subject you afraid of sth about Hakuto orbit? Maybe you are paid agent and just make mess here with FE stuff?

What is REALLY funny, is that YOU happen to believe that .gov and NASA is telling you the truth. Sad that you actually believe that a lander that displaced 6 inches worth of lunar surface (Think of all that dust flying around while the rocket was on) but MIRACULOUSLY absolutely NONE of it fell back down on the lander itself.

It’s ok. I believed alot of foolish things when I trusted my government.

Enjoy your space TV show because that’s all it is, and will ever be. Panem et circenses.

So when i said moon is 100 smaller and they were covering it. So you telling me i belive NASA and gov? Where is logic?

Why they couldn’t land on the moon inside the earth?

Your statements are hard to follow partly because the english language is a bit of a nightmare in and of itself. When you say “moon is 100 smaller and they were covering it.” I am not quite sure what you’re trying to say there. The moon is 100 times smaller than what we are told? The moon is 100 times smaller than earth, I’m just not sure where you are going with what you are attempting to say.

Not exactly 100 times smaller. If they land on the moon it could be visible how small is it. But after last post I go two ideas I measured Mars diameter from NASA video at persevereance landing. I compared offical lander dimensions like 3 meters wide, and compared this to craters there. And when lander was coming down i caompared smaller craters to bigger and then compared this again to google maps landing zone, and it was fit with official diameter. I know it wasn’t precise but from my eye calculation Mars had few thousands kilometers of diameter. So it cannot be inside the earth right?. Or… They just using much much smaller versions of this what they showing in labs on earth. Same with moon. They really could land with toy on the surface but they recored people on earth. They could even fly to orbit with astronauts but in the fact they didn’t landed. They could sent smaller version of lander to record videos.

Second idea is: There is something like space compression towards center of the earth. For example 1 km on the earth can be in 1 meter on the moon. But it still 1 km. So moon’s circumference is 11 000 km and can fit in 110 kilometers of circumference. But if you still need 11000 km of yardstick to go around. It could be called as fractality. But that’s mean Jupiter Neptune and other gas planets can be inside the earth even though they are bigger because fractality makes them smaller.
But i don’t belive it is possible so i stay with first version that they sent toy landers to moon and Mars.

I’m sorry EarthSphere, but I must respectfully disagree with your opinion here. Please don’t take offense. I’m not trying to argue, just inform.
I watched those lunar landing films as they happened when I was a kid and remember them well.

There is no tangible evidence of mirrors on the moon. You can reflect a signal from anywhere on a full moon and it will bounce back to earth.

Here’s one problem few ever talk about.
NASA claims that the daytime temperature on the moon is about 240 degrees Fahrenheit (sorry but I’ll leave the C conversion math to you!).
The maximum temperature man can survive in is about 125 degrees F. Of course no one would survive very long in that environment. And we don’t see sweat pouring off their faces, or the head bubbles being covered in condensation. So we must assume they were fairly comfortable in there, say 78 degrees F?
So what kind of cooling system would cool a man in a silver suit with a plastic bubble on his head in direct sunlight about 150 degrees F and maintain that temperature for three hours?
What kind of power source was required to operate it?
What was the fuel, how much was needed, and where was it stored?
These units would also need to excavate that heat in some fashion. I don’t recall seeing any heat signatures coming off of those suits. That would absolutely be visible both on film and in video, like what we see coming off the road on a very hot day. The entire image would be terribly distorted. We don’t see that in any of the images or footage.
Keep in mind they also had to have an oxygen supply and carbon dioxide scrubbers in those little backpacks. And of course, this was in 1969, a time when most automobiles didn’t even have air conditioning!
What was the cooling medium?
Freon was generally used back then and it typically can cool about 35 degrees F below the ambient outdoor temperatures, maximum.
If that doesn’t seem absurd enough, then consider the nighttime temperatures, -290 degrees F!
That little tin can they were flying in really needed a super heat pump and air conditioner.
Imagine how fast the temperature would rise when the capsule was exposed to the morning light, zooming up several hundred degrees in a matter of minutes, and then back down again after sunset!
And of course, what kind of fuel, where was it stored, and how was it vented?
And then what of the size and weight of such a unit and its fuel supply?
Ask any HVAC expert about such a unit and they will probably laugh. There is no such thing.
There are so many impossibilities from this so-called moon landing that it is beyond absurd.
The list seems almost endless.
I ask that you look a little deeper into the subject as it will benefit you greatly in understanding the concave earth theories and its ramifications.