Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I'm pretty sure that independent people also found pieces of Challenger.Prop malfunction.What a disgusting way to pass off the deaths of seven people, just because your closed mind can't accept the truth.
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/12/18/us/challenger-parts-wash-ashore-almost-11-years-after-explosion.html
If you are claiming that they are insulation materials, then you seem to be claiming that NASA took great care with constructing the real space ship underneath and just slaps on the important heat shielding loosely and haphazardly, in an apparently sloppy manner.Again, I never said that, Tom. Are you smoking and hallucinating?
The narrative that NASA was sending sloppy Lunar Landers to the moon with the externals seemingly built by teenagers just doesn't fit with the story that this was a professionally built marvel of engineering that was sent to the moon.
I'm stating that both the exterior hull and the insulation blankets were carefully crafted and revised a number of times. I'm stating that what you call tape was deemed enough for the blankets to stay in place and not tearing. I'm stating that given that it takes circa 1.6 newton's of thrust to lift 1kg from the moon and the LM weighed more than 16,000 kg, the lightest possible solution was key to the design. Installing heavy metal brackets to keep insulation in place (and being a too rigid solution to not tear the insulation apart) would seriously impact the fuel budget, and as you might know, you have to bring both propellant and an oxidizer.
"The photo shows the Ascent Stage in the process of assembly, before the heat shielding had been put on it:"
I'm talking about the many gaps in the exterior white hull. The pieces of the hull are not properly fitted or sealed together and there are gaps everywhere.
that's not the hull. that's paper taped to the hull.
You are aware, that in an environment with no atmosphere, dust doesn't behave like you think it does, right?Could you at least point us to the part that looks like it is "loosely held together"? I honestly have no idea what part you are talking about.
The general answer is this: making something air tight is more time consuming, heavier, and costlier than not making it air tight. If there is no reason to make it air tight, then they aren't going to bother. Electronics don't need an airtight compartment.
You are aware that when the craft landed it allegedly made large clouds of lunar dust that went everywhere. Are you telling me that NASA didn't really care about the then unknown properties of the lunar dust getting into the many gaps in the exterior hull, and onto all of the electronics?
The dust would leave the surface in the direction it's being pushed, which is, below a rocket exhaust, outwards. Dust doesn't swirl around in a vacuum like it does here on earth.
The dust would go in many directions. If you stick your face up to fine soot and give it a puff with your mouth, you will get bounceback directly into your nose -- and the fact that it gets into your nose has little to do with the atmosphere.
A real space agency and real engineers would have properly sealed the hull. Your denial and excuses are pathetic.
Pathetic? I'm not making up excuses or denying anything. Making up stuff is on your account, Tom. Be as offensive as you see fit, you're quite clearly the dumber of the two of us no matter how hard you try. Browsing this thread for replies is all it takes to confirm.
For instance, you just compared sticking your face in the sand and giving it a puff on earth with rocket engines delivering several thousand pounds of thrust against the regolith on the Moon. Heh, really?
Thank you for confirming that you're taking the bury your head in the sand approach. Even though it's not that surprising to me.
A real space agency and real engineers would have properly sealed the hull. Your denial and excuses are pathetic.
this has been explained to you many times before. the paper is not the hull. the paper covers parts of the exterior of the craft. that's it. its function is to keep some components from getting hot from sunlight exposure.
Yes, so often we find some flat-earthers swearing black and blue that Antarctica is inaccessible, that we are stupid to talk about a South Pole and lying (yes, I have been accused of thst) to claim that we can see the rotation of stars about the South Celestial Pole.
Then when we try to give evidence for these things we again told not to be stupid, "That''s not the official map!"
There is no such thing as "The Flat Earth"! It seems as though there is a different flat earth model dragged out to suit the occasion!
I know of three or more "maps" (continental layouts) and three or more different explanations for gravity - though not on this site.
But how is any newcomer meant to sort this out? The Wiki saysQuoteCircumnavigation
The Flat Earth is laid out like a North-Azimuthal projection.
The North Pole is at the center while Antarctica is at the rim. The continents are spread out around the North Pole.
It really does seem a case of "Would the real flat earth please stand up!"
You are aware, that in an environment with no atmosphere, dust doesn't behave like you think it does, right?Could you at least point us to the part that looks like it is "loosely held together"? I honestly have no idea what part you are talking about.
The general answer is this: making something air tight is more time consuming, heavier, and costlier than not making it air tight. If there is no reason to make it air tight, then they aren't going to bother. Electronics don't need an airtight compartment.
You are aware that when the craft landed it allegedly made large clouds of lunar dust that went everywhere. Are you telling me that NASA didn't really care about the then unknown properties of the lunar dust getting into the many gaps in the exterior hull, and onto all of the electronics?
The dust would leave the surface in the direction it's being pushed, which is, below a rocket exhaust, outwards. Dust doesn't swirl around in a vacuum like it does here on earth.
Could you at least point us to the part that looks like it is "loosely held together"? I honestly have no idea what part you are talking about.
The general answer is this: making something air tight is more time consuming, heavier, and costlier than not making it air tight. If there is no reason to make it air tight, then they aren't going to bother. Electronics don't need an airtight compartment.
And now Tom Bishop is an expert on the design on lunar landers,. All from what he can see from a photo!
Its a bit like all these armchair experts saying that nothing can get through that terrible thermosphere! How do these smsrty-pants think all this data on the thermosphere was gsthered?
And we have others saying that, after casting their Mark I eyeballs over a poor quality photo this or that is a fake.
Give us a break! Do some research before showing your ignorance.
I am sure that if NASA was trying to fool anybody, they would have spent a little of their budget on convincing props.
Anyoneone claiming that their cursory glance can pick up all these weaknesses just proves that they have a grossly over inflated opinion of their own abilities.
you don't have to test each piece of tape. you can just shake the whole thing.
you can also put a suite of sensors in the test vehicle when you shake it and use that data to quantify the forces on any arbitrary component.
i'm still not sure why you think it matters that they use paper and tape. the only forces the paper would experience are caused by the craft to which it is attached. there isn't anything else in a vacuum to move it around. it's not like all the package labels in a fedex truck go flying off anytime the truck hits a pothole. basically the same thing.
Are you saying that days of an equinox are the only days that the FE version of the experiment ever work properly? Why is it that the RE version works just fine on any day of the year?
An excerpt from the Wiki:
"Latitude
To locate your latitude on the flat earth, it's important to know the following fact: The degrees of the earth's latitude are based upon the angle of the sun in the sky at noon equinox.
That's why 0° N/S sits on the equator where the sun is directly overhead, and why 90° N/S sits at the poles where the sun is at a right angle to the observer. At 45 North or South from the equator, the sun will sit at an angle 45° in the sky. The angle of the sun past zenith is our latitude.
Knowing that as you recede North or South from the equator at equinox, the sun will descend at a pace of one degree per 69.5 miles, we can even derive our distance from the equator based upon the position of the sun in the sky."
Have any of those who subscribe to the FE theory tested this? I did yesterday. I'm at North 44* 05'. The sun at its high point was 28 degrees elevation (62* from zenith) using the inclinometer on my Brunton compass. Using the spherical earth theory and considering the earth's axis tilt (solar declination) I calculated 44* 12'. This was using the formula that has been used for centuries. That's pretty close to my GPS and map position. The flat earth formula described above put me at 62* North which is clearly incorrect.
What is the explanation?
This is an argument from ridicule and incredulity, nothing more.
But I wonder, if it is a fake, why such an obvious one? They surely had the budget to figure out what a real lunar lander should look like? Wait, maybe they did...
Agreed. Please show us the calculations that reveal that it isn't properly "embedded". This should include failure stress, desired safety margin, and predicted maximum stress experienced.
What makes you think they used scotch tape?
At least look at some schematics before criticizing it. Many parts aren't air tight because they don't need to be. Are you sure that the wall you are referring to needs to be air tight?
QuoteAre we really expected to believe that a real lunar lander built by the best engineers in the world would look like something some teenagers threw together in a weekend after a trip to the stationary store and the junk yard?
Just read this already. It explains why it looks the way it does. I'm sorry it isn't pretty enough for you, but "looking pretty" wasn't part of the design goals.
That's it Tom? The guy rips your world apart, and you come back with, well that crap map no longer stands, some other loony came up with another crap map, let's just ignore the rest?