This is super interesting a guy analyzes the "lunar lander"

07-28-2022, 07:33 AM

-

#1

messomi
▇ █ █ ▇ █ █ ▇

messomi
▇ █ █ ▇ █ █ ▇

Join Date: Apr 2017

Posts: 20,365

Rep Power: 362412

This is super interesting a guy analyzes the "lunar lander"

https://www.bitchute.com/video/Vqv58XchJFKt/

you don't have to watch the full video but just look at the first 7 minutes I mean if you at least don't find this extremely suspicious.

07-28-2022, 07:42 AM

-

#2

LoginCell
Registered User

LoginCell
Registered User

Join Date: May 2021

Age: 56

Posts: 1,697

Rep Power: 16634

Entered thread expecting another video of astronauts calculating the velocity of re-entry into the earth's atmosphere upside somebody's head

Leaving disappointed.

07-28-2022, 07:47 AM

-

#3

messomi
▇ █ █ ▇ █ █ ▇

messomi
▇ █ █ ▇ █ █ ▇

Join Date: Apr 2017

Posts: 20,365

Rep Power: 362412

Originally Posted By LoginCell⏩

Entered thread expecting another video of astronauts calculating the velocity of re-entry into the earth's atmosphere upside somebody's head

Leaving disappointed.

oh look it's a wincell

07-28-2022, 08:43 AM

-

#4

JaxBrah
KAG

JaxBrah
KAG

Join Date: Apr 2010

Posts: 16,521

Rep Power: 49594

in the video itself Tim Pool completely dissects and dismantles the argument this video is trying to make. i dont even know why this guy included it

cliffs:

- someone with absolutely no knowledge at all of space technology looks at lunar lander and thinks it doesnt look good to him and thus concludes the moon landings never happened

07-28-2022, 09:07 AM

-

#5

messomi
▇ █ █ ▇ █ █ ▇

messomi
▇ █ █ ▇ █ █ ▇

Join Date: Apr 2017

Posts: 20,365

Rep Power: 362412

Originally Posted By JaxBrah⏩

cliffs:

- someone with absolutely no knowledge at all of space technology looks at lunar lander and thinks it doesnt look good to him and thus concludes the moon landings never happened

cringe

07-28-2022, 09:35 AM

-

#6

BFast55
Registered User

BFast55
Registered User

Join Date: May 2010

Location: Houston, Texas, United States

Posts: 21,674

Rep Power: 89831

I mean, the fact that telescopes can pick out all of the Apollo landing sites on the moon pretty much debunks these CTs.

07-28-2022, 09:42 AM

-

#7

PenorBrahNoHomo
R1b

PenorBrahNoHomo
R1b

Join Date: Aug 2011

Location: United Kingdom (Great Britain)

Posts: 28,218

Rep Power: 130149

Even if the footage was shot in a studio it doesn't prove we never landed on the moon

07-28-2022, 09:49 AM

-

#8

knightofday
Registered User

knightofday
Registered User

Join Date: Oct 2013

Location: California, United States

Age: 39

Posts: 14,588

Rep Power: 126002

ITT: people who still don’t know/understand that the moon landing was a motion picture creation srs

There’s hours of testimony from industry professionals of all types dismantling the fake videos, audio, landing site etc.

It’s one of those things where once you dig, if you have an iq above 100, you can’t help but accept it was all fake srs

07-28-2022, 10:02 AM

-

#9

TheAdlerian
Registered User

TheAdlerian
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 44,596

Rep Power: 96349

Originally Posted By PenorBrahNoHomo⏩

Even if the footage was shot in a studio it doesn't prove we never landed on the moon

That's what I think happened.

I have a feeling that we got there, no one left the ship, and all of the footage and photos are fake.

07-28-2022, 10:04 AM

-

#10

LateShow
smashing and dashing

LateShow
smashing and dashing

Join Date: Dec 2013

Location: Minnesota, United States

Posts: 5,433

Rep Power: 56450

Originally Posted By BFast55⏩

I mean, the fact that telescopes can pick out all of the Apollo landing sites on the moon pretty much debunks these CTs.

Cool, where are the pics at of the car they left on the moon?

07-28-2022, 10:09 AM

-

#11

TheAdlerian
Registered User

TheAdlerian
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 44,596

Rep Power: 96349

Originally Posted By JaxBrah⏩

in the video itself Tim Pool completely dissects and dismantles the argument this video is trying to make. i dont even know why this guy included it

cliffs:

- someone with absolutely no knowledge at all of space technology looks at lunar lander and thinks it doesnt look good to him and thus concludes the moon landings never happened

The beginning of the video makes sense though.

At the Smithsonian many many years ago I saw life sized models of the lunar lander and they impressed me as really lames looking and wrapped in foil. At that time I know nothing about moon landing hoaxes but just thought the craft looked bad.

It's a complete lie that NASA can't recreate lunar craft. It's science and math.

That means it either works or it doesn't and there's no secret formula to making any machine.

If no one can figure out how the 60s machines worked, it means they did not.

07-28-2022, 10:11 AM

-

#12

TheAdlerian
Registered User

TheAdlerian
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 44,596

Rep Power: 96349

Originally Posted By BFast55⏩

I mean, the fact that telescopes can pick out all of the Apollo landing sites on the moon pretty much debunks these CTs.

A civilian can't see this stuff from their backyard. So, that calls into question the information we get from telescopes, which is talked about a lot on the misc.

07-28-2022, 11:27 AM

-

#13

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Join Date: Jan 2010

Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Posts: 66,951

Rep Power: 497612

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

The beginning of the video makes sense though.

At the Smithsonian many many years ago I saw life sized models of the lunar lander and they impressed me as really lames looking and wrapped in foil. At that time I know nothing about moon landing hoaxes but just thought the craft looked bad.

It's a complete lie that NASA can't recreate lunar craft. It's science and math.

That means it either works or it doesn't and there's no secret formula to making any machine.

If no one can figure out how the 60s machines worked, it means they did not.

the government started digitizing the blueprints with actively produced platforms and platforms that are no longer made but still in service. There is a crazy amount of components out there for dead programs - like the lunar landers - and they are at the bottom of the heap in terms of getting digitized.

Plus all these old drawings from 60 years ago - many are damaged beyond repair or have been lost.

On top of that - and I know this one from a project I had worked on - today's engineers are so reliant on computer models that they have difficulty reading old prints - specifically the short hand engineers used to use. The project I worked on that dealt with this - the platform was dead in the 1980s and we had to hire retired engineers from the program as contractors to help decipher the drawings and some were deemed impossible to decipher / update - and these weren't crazy specific components, one was a fuel pump.

On top of all that - the manufacturing is going to be questionable as well - which is going to be more along the lines of too expensive rather than impossible but for all intents and purposes, it's the same thing. you have to remember too, that the lunar modules on display are not complete, they have had components removed for various reasons and those components can be lost so you can't find the actual part to reverse engineer.

And then a lot of the tech used is no longer used - they were using punch card computers - not all technology can be made backwards compatible.

Trying to rebuild the originals would likely cost more than creating a new design.

07-28-2022, 11:57 AM

-

#14

JaxBrah
KAG

JaxBrah
KAG

Join Date: Apr 2010

Posts: 16,521

Rep Power: 49594

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

The beginning of the video makes sense though.

At the Smithsonian many many years ago I saw life sized models of the lunar lander and they impressed me as really lames looking and wrapped in foil. At that time I know nothing about moon landing hoaxes but just thought the craft looked bad.

It's a complete lie that NASA can't recreate lunar craft. It's science and math.

That means it either works or it doesn't and there's no secret formula to making any machine.

If no one can figure out how the 60s machines worked, it means they did not.

again, you know absolutely nothing about space crafts, the math, the science, and the materials required to get that job done. nothing. so to look at something you know nothing about, and to conclude it was impossible based off of your visual inspection is absurd.

Nasa doesnt claim it cant go back to the moon, on the contrary, it claims it will go back to the moon very soon actually. You are referring to one comment made by one NASA employee that is being misunderstood. The original craft that got them to the moon required 400,000 employees and contractors as well as 3 million individual parts with endless amounts of rudimentary highly technical schematics. His point is that they could t just make a replica today due to all of that, as well as current budget, NOT that they cant technologically get to the moon.

Think about this very simple point: They went to the moon at the height of the cold war and as a part of a fierce race to get to the moon against their mortal enemies, the Soviets. Ok, now, give me ONE singular reason as to why the Soviets would not call them out on such an obvious hoax? The masters of propaganda didnt even make the attempt to claim it was a hoax. Why would the soviets take the global humiliation if it was a hoax?

Not only that, hundreds of kilograms of moon rock was taken back and independently verified by the soviets themselves, as well as the chinese and japanese. There are also photographs of the landing sites from the Lunar Reconnasaince Orbiter (unless of course you believe all of NASA is a hoax).

Possibly even harder to comprehend is all those people involved all managed to keep their mouths shut all the way to their deathbeds.

07-28-2022, 12:44 PM

-

#15

TheAdlerian
Registered User

TheAdlerian
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 44,596

Rep Power: 96349

Originally Posted By JaxBrah⏩

again, you know absolutely nothing about space crafts, the math, the science, and the materials required to get that job done. nothing. so to look at something you know nothing about, and to conclude it was impossible based off of your visual inspection is absurd.

Nasa doesnt claim it cant go back to the moon, on the contrary, it claims it will go back to the moon very soon actually. You are referring to one comment made by one NASA employee that is being misunderstood. The original craft that got them to the moon required 400,000 employees and contractors as well as 3 million individual parts with endless amounts of rudimentary highly technical schematics. His point is that they could t just make a replica today due to all of that, as well as current budget, NOT that they cant technologically get to the moon.

Think about this very simple point: They went to the moon at the height of the cold war and as a part of a fierce race to get to the moon against their mortal enemies, the Soviets. Ok, now, give me ONE singular reason as to why the Soviets would not call them out on such an obvious hoax? The masters of propaganda didnt even make the attempt to claim it was a hoax. Why would the soviets take the global humiliation if it was a hoax?

Not only that, hundreds of kilograms of moon rock was taken back and independently verified by the soviets themselves, as well as the chinese and japanese. There are also photographs of the landing sites from the Lunar Reconnasaince Orbiter (unless of course you believe all of NASA is a hoax).

Possibly even harder to comprehend is all those people involved all managed to keep their mouths shut all the way to their deathbeds.

This is childish.

You don't know anything about the topic.

If NASA says they don't, you don't.

In addition, your post is naive.

I have said this before in other threads and I will say it again, the FBI was in OVERDRIVE during the 50s and 60s. They had THOUSAND PAGE secret documents on movie stars, singers, and so forth. They used illegal spying techniques and did not care because they feared that celebrities were secret agents of foreign governments trying to destabilize the US.

So, it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that the FBI is going to let NASA have some kind of giant mess when it came to the moon rocket plans. That is not possible. In addition, there's no way the FBI is going to let hundreds of contractors work on parts for the moon landing with no oversight. If they were concerned that Elivs was a communist agent, then they had to have been VERY concerned that scientists and builders for the moon landing with legitimate and competent.

NASA is like, we just built us a Moon Rocket y'all we didn't pay no nevermind, it just worked! That is certainly not how things were working in the 60s and you have to have a big picture point of view to understand it.

07-28-2022, 12:48 PM

-

#16

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Join Date: Jan 2010

Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Posts: 66,951

Rep Power: 497612

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

This is childish.

You don't know anything about the topic.

If NASA says they don't, you don't.

In addition, your post is naive.

I have said this before in other threads and I will say it again, the FBI was in OVERDRIVE during the 50s and 60s. They had THOUSAND PAGE secret documents on movie stars, singers, and so forth. They used illegal spying techniques and did not care because they feared that celebrities were secret agents of foreign governments trying to destabilize the US.

So, it is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that the FBI is going to let NASA have some kind of giant mess when it came to the moon rocket plans. That is not possible. In addition, there's no way the FBI is going to let hundreds of contractors work on parts for the moon landing with no oversight. If they were concerned that Elivs was a communist agent, then they had to have been VERY concerned that scientists and builders for the moon landing with legitimate and competent.

NASA is like, we just built us a Moon Rocket y'all we didn't pay no nevermind, it just worked! That is certainly not how things were working in the 60s and you have to have a big picture point of view to understand it.

I addressed a lot of this in my post above - and it is like Jax said - it's not that NASA said they can't go to the moon, they said they can't go back to the moon with the original landers cause the tech is so out of date and potentially lost it would be an exercise in futility to try and recreate it, they'd be better off starting from scratch but there is no real incentive to go back to the moon right now. There is no real point.

07-28-2022, 12:49 PM

-

#17

Barteh
Registered User

Barteh
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2012

Location: -, -, Netherlands

Age: 36

Posts: 20,781

Rep Power: 125767

It's okay brah they just lost the technology that's all.

07-28-2022, 12:49 PM

-

#18

thedarrenestes
Country ass chit

thedarrenestes
Country ass chit

Join Date: Oct 2013

Posts: 3,862

Rep Power: 69127

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

NASA is like, we just built us a Moon Rocket y'all we didn't pay no nevermind, it just worked! That is certainly not how things were working in the 60s and you have to have a big picture point of view to understand it.

brb I can't explain how 747s work

Air travel is faked

07-28-2022, 12:49 PM

-

#19

SuperHercules

SuperHercules

Join Date: Jun 2014

Height: 6'5"

Posts: 32,276

Subscribers: 7

Rep Power: 565245

Originally Posted By messomi⏩

oh look it's a wincell

There are like 5 wincels here already lol

07-28-2022, 12:51 PM

-

#20

OneLegSquats
Registered User

OneLegSquats
Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2018

Age: 56

Posts: 26,031

Rep Power: 118538

How come all these conspiracy theorists sound the same lol. That weak, timid voice of pis

07-28-2022, 12:54 PM

-

#21

TheAdlerian
Registered User

TheAdlerian
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 44,596

Rep Power: 96349

Originally Posted By Cleveland33⏩

the government started digitizing the blueprints with actively produced platforms and platforms that are no longer made but still in service. There is a crazy amount of components out there for dead programs - like the lunar landers - and they are at the bottom of the heap in terms of getting digitized.

Plus all these old drawings from 60 years ago - many are damaged beyond repair or have been lost.

On top of that - and I know this one from a project I had worked on - today's engineers are so reliant on computer models that they have difficulty reading old prints - specifically the short hand engineers used to use. The project I worked on that dealt with this - the platform was dead in the 1980s and we had to hire retired engineers from the program as contractors to help decipher the drawings and some were deemed impossible to decipher / update - and these weren't crazy specific components, one was a fuel pump.

On top of all that - the manufacturing is going to be questionable as well - which is going to be more along the lines of too expensive rather than impossible but for all intents and purposes, it's the same thing. you have to remember too, that the lunar modules on display are not complete, they have had components removed for various reasons and those components can be lost so you can't find the actual part to reverse engineer.

And then a lot of the tech used is no longer used - they were using punch card computers - not all technology can be made backwards compatible.

Trying to rebuild the originals would likely cost more than creating a new design.

You are talking about it like it's in isolation.

We have documents from hundreds and thousands of years ago. However, no one thought plans for the MOON LANDING would be of interest to people say, three hundred years from now?

That's nonsense. There's giant government organization just for records.

As I keep saying, the FBI had enormous documents about celebrities. So, agents tracked and spied on Burt Lancaster, Elvis, Martin Luther King, John Lennon, etc, but not the moon project? Burt Lancaster has a thousand page FBI and I doubt he knew it, and all he did was have weird sex and make adventure movies.

If you wanted to make America look like a failure, you have one or two spies posing as contractors to make defective parts for the moon rocket, and mission accomplished. The same goes for the people working for NASA. The FBI HAD to be monitoring them very closely.

Burt Lancaster was nothing compared to the moon project.

So, it's literally impossible that the FBI would allow chaos to occur when making one of these most important projects in the history of the world, lol.

You have to step back and think about that.

07-28-2022, 12:56 PM

-

#22

TheAdlerian
Registered User

TheAdlerian
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 44,596

Rep Power: 96349

Originally Posted By thedarrenestes⏩

brb I can't explain how 747s work

Air travel is faked

Retarded.

The people who make 747s can and will explain how they work and if you had the money, they would build you one.

Please go and learn about analogies.

07-28-2022, 01:00 PM

-

#23

thedarrenestes
Country ass chit

thedarrenestes
Country ass chit

Join Date: Oct 2013

Posts: 3,862

Rep Power: 69127

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

Retarded.

The people who make 747s can and will explain how they work and if you had the money, they would build you one.

Please go and learn about analogies.

It's evident that just because someone can explain it to you doesn't mean they can also understand it for you too

07-28-2022, 01:02 PM

-

#24

TheAdlerian
Registered User

TheAdlerian
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 44,596

Rep Power: 96349

Originally Posted By Cleveland33⏩

I addressed a lot of this in my post above - and it is like Jax said - it's not that NASA said they can't go to the moon, they said they can't go back to the moon with the original landers cause the tech is so out of date and potentially lost it would be an exercise in futility to try and recreate it, they'd be better off starting from scratch but there is no real incentive to go back to the moon right now. There is no real point.

No, the story is, and you can look it up, that NASA does not have plans for the moon rocket, etc.

Their story is that no single entity made it and so there were thousands of plans for thousands of uniquely made parts. So, it's not like Bob Jones drew up plans and they were on in one place.

The story is that thousands of parts were special ordered from thousands of people who specially designed them.

So, there was no unified plan.

That means no one can analyze how the machines actually worked, why, and so on.

Nowadays, you could probably input all of the plans in a computer and get an engineering simulation. However, no one can do that because there are no plans.

As I have posted many times, there's no way in hell the FBI would allow such sloppiness as they were all about monitoring potentially subversive people. There is literally no way the moon program would not have been kept in tight order.

07-28-2022, 01:06 PM

-

#25

TheAdlerian
Registered User

TheAdlerian
Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2007

Posts: 44,596

Rep Power: 96349

Originally Posted By thedarrenestes⏩

It's evident that just because someone can explain it to you doesn't mean they can also understand it for you too

That's like you in this thread, lol.

The topic is not about explaining things. It's about people saying they have no idea how 747s work because they lost the plans.

If that was true, there's probably hundreds of people who never worked with 747s who could figure it out exactly.

Meanwhile, the moon landing gear has a LOT of questions and many people saying various items should not be able to work. NASA says "We don't know because we lost the plans" and it's not logical.

07-28-2022, 02:29 PM

-

#26

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Join Date: Jan 2010

Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Posts: 66,951

Rep Power: 497612

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

You are talking about it like it's in isolation.
We have documents from hundreds and thousands of years ago. However, no one thought plans for the MOON LANDING would be of interest to people say, three hundred years from now?
That's nonsense. There's giant government organization just for records.

They aren’t the government’s to organize. They belong to the contractor that built it. They do know they are important and they are supposed to be saved just like every purchase order and invoice that was involved in those projects. But it was 60+ years ago – stuff goes missing, gets misplaced, misfiled, and a lot of things are suffering from physical deterioration.

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

As I keep saying, the FBI had enormous documents about celebrities. So, agents tracked and spied on Burt Lancaster, Elvis, Martin Luther King, John Lennon, etc, but not the moon project? Burt Lancaster has a thousand page FBI and I doubt he knew it, and all he did was have weird sex and make adventure movies.
If you wanted to make America look like a failure, you have one or two spies posing as contractors to make defective parts for the moon rocket, and mission accomplished. The same goes for the people working for NASA. The FBI HAD to be monitoring them very closely.

Do celebrities need security clearance? No.
That is why employees for NASA and defense contractors have to be vetted and are assigned specific levels of security clearance based on their background checks

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

So, it's literally impossible that the FBI would allow chaos to occur when making one of these most important projects in the history of the world, lol.
You have to step back and think about that.

Step back and think about this – do you think the FBI is monitoring every member of the military for spies? Or every person that works for Lockheed Martin or Boeing? They certainly do not. You get assigned security clearance and if you move to projects that require higher clearance, you have to go through more rigorous screening.

07-28-2022, 02:31 PM

-

#27

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Join Date: Jan 2010

Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Posts: 66,951

Rep Power: 497612

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

No, the story is, and you can look it up, that NASA does not have plans for the moon rocket, etc.
Their story is that no single entity made it and so there were thousands of plans for thousands of uniquely made parts. So, it's not like Bob Jones drew up plans and they were on in one place.

I don’t know where you got that story – the lunar lander specifically was designed and built by Grumman - and this is how they still do it today. Boeing doesn't design or build altimeters, they get them from a subcontractor but they are part of the overall design of the aircraft and have to meet the determined specs.

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

The story is that thousands of parts were special ordered from thousands of people who specially designed them.
So, there was no unified plan.

Again – Grumman designed the lander – it was their plan. The government doesn’t just say “hey we want something that will land on the moon, send us a proposal” They include all kinds of requirements and specifications that the proposals have to meet. Each component has technical specifications and capabilities that it has to be uniquely tested for. Then if that component goes on a sub assembly, the sub assembly has to pass testing. And on and on up until the entire craft gets tested.

from Wikipedia and there is more about who was contracted for the nav systems and the like
In July 1962, eleven firms were invited to submit proposals for the LEM. Nine companies responded in September, answering 20 questions posed by the NASA RFP in a 60-page limited technical proposal. Grumman was awarded the contract officially on November 7, 1962. Grumman had begun lunar orbit rendezvous studies in the late 1950s and again in 1961. The contract cost was expected to be around $350 million. There were initially four major subcontractors: Bell Aerosystems (ascent engine), Hamilton Standard (environmental control systems), Marquardt (reaction control system) and Rocketdyne (descent engine).

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

That means no one can analyze how the machines actually worked, why, and so on.

If your scenario were true, then maybe but there was a unified plan.

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

Nowadays, you could probably input all of the plans in a computer and get an engineering simulation. However, no one can do that because there are no plans.

No one said there are no plans. I said the chances of there being all the plans are slim. The technology is so out of date it is unlikely to be able to replicate it. There is a good chance some of the raw materials used on it are no longer readily available.

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

As I have posted many times, there's no way in hell the FBI would allow such sloppiness as they were all about monitoring potentially subversive people.
There is literally no way the moon program would not have been kept in tight order.

the FBI doesn’t have jurisdiction over this unless they are opening a criminal investigation against the contractors that built them but it would really serve no purpose – there is no point in making the lunar module from the 60s today.

07-28-2022, 02:38 PM

-

#28

thedarrenestes
Country ass chit

thedarrenestes
Country ass chit

Join Date: Oct 2013

Posts: 3,862

Rep Power: 69127

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

The people who make 747s can and will explain how they work

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

The topic is not about explaining things.

You are literally too obtuse to insult

Stick to simpleton topics like the proper hip hinge for a 1,048 triple

07-28-2022, 02:39 PM

-

#29

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Cleveland33
Registered Gooner

Join Date: Jan 2010

Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States

Posts: 66,951

Rep Power: 497612

Originally Posted By TheAdlerian⏩

That's like you in this thread, lol.

The topic is not about explaining things. It's about people saying they have no idea how 747s work because they lost the plans.

If that was true, there's probably hundreds of people who never worked with 747s who could figure it out exactly.

Meanwhile, the moon landing gear has a LOT of questions and many people saying various items should not be able to work. NASA says "We don't know because we lost the plans" and it's not logical.

I don't know what isn't logical about that - if they don't have the plan they would need to reverse engineer the landing gear but they are not going to tear apart something historic just so they can answer people's questions. There is no value in it.