EngineerMan

NASA and Rockets
« on: February 23, 2020, 11:51:41 PM »
So I have worked for NASA and other organizations.  Can you explain to me how I have been fooled by them?  I have participated in dozens of tests and witnessed numerous launches.  I have calculated trajectories and return paths.  All must include terrain, atmosphere, curvature, and rotation of the earth (among other significant factors) in order to obtain accurate results.  If I make a mistake human life is at risk.  If I omit those basic considerations from my calculations nothing works out.  I grew up with relatives and friend’s relatives who all worked on the Apollo program, space shuttle, and space station.  I followed suit as an engineer working on shuttle, space station, and other projects. 

How have I been fooled?  Did my family and friends lie to me?  Have I been living a fantasy? How does that play into your flat earth model?

totallackey

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2020, 04:20:49 PM »
So I have worked for NASA and other organizations.  Can you explain to me how I have been fooled by them?  I have participated in dozens of tests and witnessed numerous launches.  I have calculated trajectories and return paths.  All must include terrain, atmosphere, curvature, and rotation of the earth (among other significant factors) in order to obtain accurate results.  If I make a mistake human life is at risk.  If I omit those basic considerations from my calculations nothing works out.  I grew up with relatives and friend’s relatives who all worked on the Apollo program, space shuttle, and space station.  I followed suit as an engineer working on shuttle, space station, and other projects. 

How have I been fooled?  Did my family and friends lie to me?  Have I been living a fantasy? How does that play into your flat earth model?
I have seen some launches myself.

Quite the spectacle.

Can you provide some specific background as to what type of functions are used regarding rocket launches?

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 3179
    • View Profile
Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2020, 05:49:07 PM »
Can you provide some specific background as to what type of functions are used regarding rocket launches?

"Function" could have multiple meanings in this context; mathematical functions? function of mechanical components?

What do you mean by it?
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

EngineerMan

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2020, 03:29:57 AM »
I have seen some launches myself.

Quite the spectacle.

Can you provide some specific background as to what type of functions are used regarding rocket launches?

I don’t know what you mean.  There are a lot of “functions”.  Are you speaking calculations?  Guidance?  Simulations?  Can’t even begin to scratch the surface in a forum.  Kinematics alone would fill a textbook.

Offline somerled

  • *
  • Posts: 319
    • View Profile
Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2020, 10:53:53 AM »
So I have worked for NASA and other organizations.  Can you explain to me how I have been fooled by them?  I have participated in dozens of tests and witnessed numerous launches.  I have calculated trajectories and return paths.  All must include terrain, atmosphere, curvature, and rotation of the earth (among other significant factors) in order to obtain accurate results.  If I make a mistake human life is at risk.  If I omit those basic considerations from my calculations nothing works out.  I grew up with relatives and friend’s relatives who all worked on the Apollo program, space shuttle, and space station.  I followed suit as an engineer working on shuttle, space station, and other projects. 

How have I been fooled?  Did my family and friends lie to me?  Have I been living a fantasy? How does that play into your flat earth model?

I'm sure you will be aware , since you worked there ,  that nasa uses flat earth geocentric coordinate system in it's rocket launches and space endeavors. Apparently it sometimes uses the heliocentric model occasionally for trajectories to the outer planets .

totallackey

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2020, 12:17:19 PM »
I have seen some launches myself.

Quite the spectacle.

Can you provide some specific background as to what type of functions are used regarding rocket launches?

I don’t know what you mean.  There are a lot of “functions”.  Are you speaking calculations?  Guidance?  Simulations?  Can’t even begin to scratch the surface in a forum.  Kinematics alone would fill a textbook.
If you would be kind enough to start with just presenting one of them you found necessary to fulfill the requirements of your job duties.

Let's start with one on math.

Thanks.

EngineerMan

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2020, 01:23:51 PM »
I'm sure you will be aware , since you worked there ,  that nasa uses flat earth geocentric coordinate system in it's rocket launches and space endeavors. Apparently it sometimes uses the heliocentric model occasionally for trajectories to the outer planets .

Ummm.  Geocentric coordinate system assumes earth is a spheroid and measures all 3 axes from the center of the earth.  Heliocentric assumes sun is a spheroid.

This is all very fundamental...

EngineerMan

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #7 on: February 25, 2020, 01:46:25 PM »

If you would be kind enough to start with just presenting one of them you found necessary to fulfill the requirements of your job duties.

Let's start with one on math.

Thanks.

Why don’t you pick one and tell me why it is fallacious?  Pick gravity, angular velocity of the earth, coordinate systems, atmospheric models, terrain models, etc.  Any of them.  Maybe you can explain how to propagate a trajectory though a flat earth model vs a geoid based model including all of the above considerations.  That will make it simple since you are only calculating surface to surface trajectories within the atmosphere.

totallackey

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #8 on: February 25, 2020, 04:32:46 PM »

If you would be kind enough to start with just presenting one of them you found necessary to fulfill the requirements of your job duties.

Let's start with one on math.

Thanks.

Why don’t you pick one and tell me why it is fallacious?  Pick gravity, angular velocity of the earth, coordinate systems, atmospheric models, terrain models, etc.  Any of them.  Maybe you can explain how to propagate a trajectory though a flat earth model vs a geoid based model including all of the above considerations.  That will make it simple since you are only calculating surface to surface trajectories within the atmosphere.
Wow.

I asked if you would be kind enough to write about some functions related to your job.

You opened the discussion and I posed an honest, straightforward query, following it up with more specificity, re:math functions.

Why don't you pick one and let's write about it.

It's your thread.

*

Offline Tumeni

  • *
  • Posts: 3179
    • View Profile
Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #9 on: February 25, 2020, 06:56:09 PM »
Sorry, this is still way too vague a request.

"Maths functions" with respect to what part of the overall project?

Calculating strength of the rocket body? Calculating trajectory? Something else?
=============================
Not Flat. Happy to prove this, if you ask me.
=============================

Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

Nearly?

EngineerMan

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #10 on: February 25, 2020, 06:57:00 PM »
Wow.

I asked if you would be kind enough to write about some functions related to your job.

You opened the discussion and I posed an honest, straightforward query, following it up with more specificity, re:math functions.

Why don't you pick one and let's write about it.

It's your thread.

I think you misconstrued my response.  Most of the models used are standards, the algorithms and math are publicly available, and therefore there is no sense in me doing a tutorial on them.

If you want me to pick one how about we talk about altitude as it relates to elevation?  I have used the DTED (available from USGS https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov) and routinely convert between geoid-based, ellipsoid-based (HAE), and mean sea level (MSL) based.  Us round-earthers don't believe the earth is round but elliptical.  The WGS84 provides a standard for the elliptical representation of the earth and elevation is based on that.  We can use terrain modeling for all kinds of purposes including avoidance by aircraft and tactical ballistic missiles.

Given the publicly available information for these altitude and terrain modeling/standards perhaps you can explain why these spheroidal based models are accurate if the earth is flat.

totallackey

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #11 on: February 26, 2020, 10:53:26 AM »
Wow.

I asked if you would be kind enough to write about some functions related to your job.

You opened the discussion and I posed an honest, straightforward query, following it up with more specificity, re:math functions.

Why don't you pick one and let's write about it.

It's your thread.

I think you misconstrued my response.  Most of the models used are standards, the algorithms and math are publicly available, and therefore there is no sense in me doing a tutorial on them.

If you want me to pick one how about we talk about altitude as it relates to elevation?  I have used the DTED (available from USGS https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov) and routinely convert between geoid-based, ellipsoid-based (HAE), and mean sea level (MSL) based.  Us round-earthers don't believe the earth is round but elliptical.  The WGS84 provides a standard for the elliptical representation of the earth and elevation is based on that.  We can use terrain modeling for all kinds of purposes including avoidance by aircraft and tactical ballistic missiles.

Given the publicly available information for these altitude and terrain modeling/standards perhaps you can explain why these spheroidal based models are accurate if the earth is flat.
Again, it is your thread.

You are an engineer who worked for "NASA and other agencies."

You, "calculated trajectories and return paths.  All must include terrain, atmosphere, curvature, and rotation of the earth (among other significant factors) in order to obtain accurate results."

Let's start there.

What launches did you work on, in turn performing these specific functions?
« Last Edit: February 26, 2020, 01:38:49 PM by totallackey »

Offline somerled

  • *
  • Posts: 319
    • View Profile
Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #12 on: February 26, 2020, 12:25:39 PM »
I'm sure you will be aware , since you worked there ,  that nasa uses flat earth geocentric coordinate system in it's rocket launches and space endeavors. Apparently it sometimes uses the heliocentric model occasionally for trajectories to the outer planets .

Ummm.  Geocentric coordinate system assumes earth is a spheroid and measures all 3 axes from the center of the earth.  Heliocentric assumes sun is a spheroid.

This is all very fundamental...

Ummm no . Heliocentric model is fundamental to heliocentric model . Geocentric model is fundamental to the geeocentric model.

The fact that the geocentric model is used in space travel suggests the heliocentric model is unusable . This is logic .

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6535
    • View Profile
Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #13 on: February 26, 2020, 12:31:02 PM »
The fact that the geocentric model is used in space travel suggests the heliocentric model is unusable . This is logic .
By "geocentric", I would imagine that if you're putting a satellite into orbit the only thing you need to consider is the earth and the gravity of it.
It's not "geocentric" in the sense that it assumes the earth is at the centre of anything, but other bodies probably don't need to be considered simply because their gravitational effects are too small to make a difference. Just like relativistic effects generally don't need to considered in many situations. That doesn't invalidate relativity, it just means for certain things the effects are too small to make a difference so for simplicity it can be disregarded.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

EngineerMan

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #14 on: February 26, 2020, 07:29:17 PM »
Ummm.  Geocentric coordinate system assumes earth is a spheroid and measures all 3 axes from the center of the earth.  Heliocentric assumes sun is a spheroid.

This is all very fundamental...

Ummm no . Heliocentric model is fundamental to heliocentric model . Geocentric model is fundamental to the geeocentric model.

The fact that the geocentric model is used in space travel suggests the heliocentric model is unusable . This is logic .

Ummm yes.  Geocentric "model" and geocentric "coordinate system" refer to two different things.  Geocentric "model" proposes the earth is the center of the solar system.  Geocentric "coordinate system" is just that: x,y,z axes measured from the center of the earth.

Similarly with the heliocentric "model" and heliocentric "coordinate system".

EngineerMan

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #15 on: February 26, 2020, 07:56:00 PM »
What launches did you work on, in turn performing these specific functions?

I worked quite a few of the SpaceLab missions.  I worked with the ESA, Germans, and Japanese:  STS-35, STS-40, STS-42, STS-45, STS-50, STS-47, STS-52, STS-56, STS-55, and STS-58
After STS-58 I went on to work data acquisition and distribution for ISS.  After my stint working with the ISS I transitioned to private industry and worked telecomm and datacomm receiving 3 patents for my work there.  After that I returned to grad school for my PhD while working in the defense industry.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2020, 08:03:04 PM by EngineerMan »

totallackey

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #16 on: February 26, 2020, 08:12:13 PM »
What launches did you work on, in turn performing these specific functions?

I worked quite a few of the SpaceLab missions.  I worked with the ESA, Germans, and Japanese:  STS-35, STS-40, STS-42, STS-45, STS-50, STS-47, STS-52, STS-56, STS-55, and STS-58
After STS-58 I went on to work data acquisition and distribution for ISS.  After my stint working with the ISS I transitioned to private industry and worked telecomm and datacomm receiving 3 patents for my work there.  After that I returned to grad school for my PhD while working in the defense industry.
Sounds interesting.

Could please share what specific math calculations you used in regard to STS-35 launch angle?

EngineerMan

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #17 on: February 26, 2020, 09:53:30 PM »
Sounds interesting.

Could please share what specific math calculations you used in regard to STS-35 launch angle?

I didn't calculate any STS launch angles.  My experience with trajectory calculations and flight path analysis were outside of my NASA experience.

My work with NASA involved SpaceLab and ISS.  For STS-35 I worked on the instrument pointing system (IPS).  The IPS was a three axis platform for aiming instruments (such as telescopes) at astronomical targets.  I worked on the software that tested the ability of the IPS to aim the telescopes toward the target while using guide stars to maintain the IPS in a stable position.

I'm more interested in how the flat earth community proposes that after a multi-decade career that included NASA and defense work that I have been fooled into thinking the earth is round if it is actually flat.  That is what intrigues me and that is what I asked in my original post.  No one has addressed how such a huge conspiracy could be pulled off and maintained.

EngineerMan

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #18 on: February 27, 2020, 03:41:32 AM »
Can anyone tell me how such a large conspiracy could succeed?  How multiple countries could participate in this conspiracy?  Even when some of those countries aren’t allies?  What about exo-atmospheric weapons?  Do those concern you?

totallackey

Re: NASA and Rockets
« Reply #19 on: February 27, 2020, 11:41:59 AM »
Sounds interesting.

Could please share what specific math calculations you used in regard to STS-35 launch angle?

I didn't calculate any STS launch angles.  My experience with trajectory calculations and flight path analysis were outside of my NASA experience.

But you do have experience with trajectory calculations and flight path analysis.

That's great!

Can you provide us with an example of what work you did perform with trajectory calculations and flight path analysis?