"Show us a photo of either the descent or the ascent rockets firing and the exhaust plume. And exactly how does a space craft fly when "The engine is NOT ON"" -Stelios at the DIF Google search this site
Oh, I don't dispute--I don't think any of us dispute--that they were very good at their jobs. Just that they didn't really know what it took to make a man safe on the Moon.
If you're talking about the seamstresses who made the suits, I think you can say pretty confidently that they were very aware of the necessity to make a suit airtight if it is to keep an astronaut alive on the moon.
Lately a new "meme" has been circulating among the hoax crowd: that none of the 400,000 people who worked on Apollo could have had any idea that it was a hoax because the project was "compartmentalized". Only a few people at the top knew, or had access to the information needed to know.
This is utterly absurd on its face, of course. NASA is not the NSA or CIA. Even in those organizations, information frequently leaks around -- and out. Especially when it involves a scandal.
The idea insults the intelligence of all those who worked on the program. Just because your average hoaxer wouldn't have known how to interpret the information available to him doesn't mean that was true for all those Apollo workers. Face it; they were all a lot smarter than your average hoaxer.
And it flies in the face of good engineering management. Every technical manager, especially on an unprecedented, large and complex project with a lot of unknowns, knows the importance of open communication. People are encouraged to talk about their work with others, to give seminars, to write articles. Sometimes you have to twist their arms to do it, but it pays off. Hoaxers have no more understanding of engineering culture than they do of the physics underlying engineering, so they have an amazingly naive and simplistic view that just happens to suit their biases.
Lately a new "meme" has been circulating among the hoax crowd: that none of the 400,000 people who worked on Apollo could have had any idea that it was a hoax because the project was "compartmentalized". Only a few people at the top knew, or had access to the information needed to know.
That's not new. The idea was circulating around a decade ago when I first heard about the moon hoax.
Joined: Aug 2006 Gender: Female Posts: 3,492 Location: Olympia
Re: Jarrah White vs Phil Plait « Reply #33 on Feb 24, 2011, 9:36pm »
The women knew they'd done a good job. They didn't necessarily know that the specifications they were given was what it would take to protect a man on the Moon.
I'm not disputing that a lot of people knew that their bit worked, and I'm not disputing that a lot of people had to therefore know other people's bits worked as well. I'm saying that it doesn't come across as entirely believable that every single person working on Apollo knew that every single bit worked for what it was intended to do. (Note that I am also not disputing that Apollo is real and did what NASA says it did.) There are several things like the patches which are just standard work for people without much technical knowledge. Does the number include the people who built the various buildings? The metalworkers? What exactly does that 400,000-person number include?
I'm saying that it doesn't come across as entirely believable that every single person working on Apollo knew that every single bit worked for what it was intended to do.
I agree with this as stated. But I am also pretty confident that if some part of the project was in serious trouble, word would definitely get around. Rumors fly; you can't stop people from talking. I'm sure there were many throughout Apollo, especially in the period after the Apollo 1 fire.
People wouldn't necessary know all the details, but they'd know there was a problem and they could figure out where to go if they wanted to know more.
Joined: Jul 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 475 Location: United Kingdom
Re: Jarrah White vs Phil Plait « Reply #36 on Feb 24, 2011, 11:23pm »
I think project Apollo is much more subtle. In modern parlance, it is known as 'systems thinking.' This does not simply mean joining lots of mechanical bits together and making them work. It means joining a whole team together and making it work, having all people on the team understanding the common goal. To do that, there needs to be a common culture and understanding what that goal is. That's why I don't buy Apollo being compartmentalised, or that there was any form of assembly line. With assembly lines comes assembly line mentality.
In the UK, we describe unreliable cars as Friday afternoon cars. The sort of car that was put together on Friday afternoon when the weekend was approaching. Apollo could not afford that, and that is why it was a success. So to describe any part of it as being an assembly line is, in my opinion, very wrong.
I agree with this as stated. But I am also pretty confident that if there was some part of the project was in serious trouble, word would definitely get around. Rumors fly; you can't stop people from talking. I'm sure there were many throughout Apollo, especially in the period after the Apollo 1 fire.
Sure. And I believe that a large percentage of people involved in Apollo would have heard about it. I'm just trying to narrow down what percentage it's reasonable to accept that it would be. Again, who exactly is included in that 400,000 people?
Re: Jarrah White vs Phil Plait « Reply #38 on Feb 25, 2011, 4:18am »
From personal experience, I have to agree with Gillian. Years ago I worked at a machine shop that made aircraft structural components. We could ensure that the parts we made matched the specifications we were given, but there wasn't a single person in the shop, from manufacturing engineers to machinists to inspectors, that could determine if those parts had been designed properly in the first place (unless they were so poorly designed that they were impossible to manufacture).
This wasn't deliberate compartmentalization (or assembly-line work; our production runs were extremely small), it's just how contract manufacturing works. It simply wasn't feasible for us to second-guess the design engineers or track the parts we made to determine, for example, if the assemblers had to use too much shim for our wing ribs, or if the door that used our hinges wouldn't close properly, or if our landing gear forks eventually developed fatigue cracks (unless the problems were our fault). Our project managers might have known, but that doesn't guarantee the people on the shop floor would find out.
Joined: Dec 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 1,011 Location: Wales
Re: Jarrah White vs Phil Plait « Reply #39 on Feb 25, 2011, 6:29am »
I appreciate that many would not know the full design, but the person putting a thread on a rod for whatever reason would appreciate that that rod was made of a metal that would do a job and the thread design had a use. It was not a chocolate tea pot, you were not building hooky components.
That would mean, for example, someone higher up the chain could back track down the chain and possible find out when that lathe was installed and what angle cutter (and what tip) was used.
To do that, there needs to be a common culture and understanding what that goal is.
This was often expressed by Apollo workers as "if the mission fails or the crew dies, it won't be because of me."
I have to think that for most people this extended somewhat beyond their immediate job responsibilities; if someone happened to see something that didn't look right, they'd feel that they should inquire further or at least tell their manager. Because if they didn't, and the crew dies, then it would be at least partly their fault -- for not reporting it.
Sadly, I think much of this mindset was lost in the post-Apollo years, and it accounted for both the Challenger and Columbia disasters. Management has to set the overall tone; they have to tell people that it's their job to say something when something doesn't look right.
With Challenger, especially, there were engineers who did exactly that (Roger Boisjoly in particular) but were directly rebuffed by their managers. And then the same themes came out again after the loss of Columbia. It was all very depressing.
Re: Jarrah White vs Phil Plait « Reply #43 on Feb 28, 2011, 11:19am »
I think he's especially enraged by those who attain fame through his or her debunking of Apollo hoax myths. He probably feels that fame is rightfully his. Or something.
I think he's especially enraged by those who attain fame through his or her debunking of Apollo hoax myths. He probably feels that fame is rightfully his. Or something.
- which might be, that because these people are his intellectual superiors, they manage to sow a seed in him, that sneak up in his mind as a nagging fear, that they are right after all, and that his whole position is about to crack and fall apart. To kill this fear inside he has to kill the outside enemies, that cause the fear.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author![[avatar]](http://i817.photobucket.com/albums/zz99/Chew64/Chew/me.jpg "[avatar]")
Logged![[avatar]](http://www.braeunig.us/pics/gemini.jpg "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/4969/evergreen100.jpg "[avatar]")
![[msn]](http://images.proboards.com/msn.gif "[msn]")
![[avatar]](http://i756.photobucket.com/albums/xx203/LukePemberton/LukeRugby.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Lunation_animation_April_2007.gif "[avatar]")