|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 3, 2010 23:26:15 GMT -4
Also, with regards to the LEM design. Do we need to rely on your excellent memory, or are the original blueprints still readily available? That is, the actual drawings that were used to fabricate the parts, or any slightly higher level of detail that would allow a serious engineer to evaluate the design? Try here. It's a good place to start anyway. And for the love of Pete, it's LM, not LEM, the E was dropped well before they even designed the thing because they didn't like the term "Excursion", so it was renamed as just the "Lunar Module".
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Feb 4, 2010 0:27:08 GMT -4
I take it you are Jay Windley? Nice to meet you.Yes, thank you. What do you think about McGowan's comments about Phil Plait?Nothing McGowan has to say impresses me much. Do we need to rely on your excellent memory, or are the original blueprints still readily available?Do you even know what "the blueprints" are with respect to a spacecraft design? Each LM shipped with approximately a boxcar of supporting design documentation. The important elements of the design were microfilmed. A surprising amount has survived on paper. My point was that you assumed no one had followed up on the LM design. In fact many of us have studied it, and a few have studied it in depth. The conspiracy theorists assume they are the only ones who have done any research. They really can't deal with the notion that people who are better informed than they reach a different conclusion about the authenticity. They are comfort in the delusion that their critics invariably argue from ignorance. That is, the actual drawings that were used to fabricate the parts, or any slightly higher level of detail that would allow a serious engineer to evaluate the design?Examples of both survive. Consider that engineer Scott Sullivan has thoroughly reconstructed the mechanical design for the LM in his book Virtual LM. There is more design information publicly available on the LM than for the Boeing 737.
|
|
|
Post by porphyry on Feb 4, 2010 1:44:59 GMT -4
Jay, I always imagined that the blueprints would be voluminous, and that they all would be preserved on microfilm. Your claim to have memorized them all is rather astounding to me, but I won't quiz you. And I wouldn't expect much information to be available about the 737, since the IP would be private property of Boeing.
|
|
|
Post by Cavorite on Feb 4, 2010 1:51:33 GMT -4
And who owns the "IP" of the LM? Think carefuly before you answer.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Feb 4, 2010 13:20:11 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Feb 4, 2010 14:15:43 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Feb 4, 2010 14:36:25 GMT -4
Jay, I always imagined that the blueprints would be voluminous, and that they all would be preserved on microfilm. Your claim to have memorized them all is rather astounding to me...Straw man. I didn't claim to have memorized all of them. I said I could reproduce certain key elements of the design from memory, including the specific ones you brought up. What do you know about the LM and why should your opinion of its spaceworthiness be considered an informed one? In the heyday, Grumman was producing up to 4,000 drawings per week in the LM design effort. Not all of those drawings are necessary once you stop producing the product, nor are all of them required in order to validate the design. Not all of them were kept. Earlier you claimed no one was familiar with the LM design. Now you're whining that people are. Get used to the idea that people know more about the LM than you or McGowan, and they don't agree with your suspicions that it didn't really work. And I wouldn't expect much information to be available about the 737, since the IP would be private property of Boeing.You're correct. But no one questions the general airworthiness of the 737. It is understood to be a good design even if the details of that design are private. Based on what we can read (e.g., repair manuals, accident reports) and what we can see, we can evaluate the design. But in contrast you have another vehicle whose design is laid bare for any engineer to examine. There is enough information available for a qualified engineer either to endorse or condemn the design. There isn't any privacy or room for ambiguity. You're following the typical hoax believer sequence of arguments. First you insinuate that "the blueprints" are no longer available, hence Grumman and NASA must be trying to hide them from people who would detect the forgery. That turns out to be a dead end because the LM is amply documented. Hoax believers simply don't know what design documentation looks like, where to find it, or how to evaluate it. Then you insinuate that no one really knows about those designs. But because neither you nor any other hoax believer has been within ten miles of an aerospace engineering company or an academic program, you don't know that the LM is considered a very good example of spacecraft design and so is studied heavily. You don't know that some modern engineers have even made it their special project to keep that design knowledge alive. So finally you resort to "sour grapes" and say that anyone who claims to be an expert in LM design must be lying, because such knowledge would be impossible to obtain. You're simply grasping ever more desperately at whatever straws mean you don't have to face up to the hoax theory's lack of support. You can't deal with the notion that people who know a whole lot about space and space engineering don't share your "doubts." So you have to make up some scenario where such people either don't exist or are somehow deluded.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Feb 4, 2010 17:18:34 GMT -4
Porphyry, your characterisation of Jay's memory is wildly out of place. The ability for an engineer to produce drawings from memory of a heavily studied engineering example is nothing less than you would expect from a half-way competent engineer (I'm sure he won't mind me saying). I would suggest (and if anyone wishes to disagree feel free) that it is similar to the ability of many musicians to hold complex tunes in their heads and produce them on demand when handed an instrument.
I am not an engineer. However, I have read enough on the subject to be able to produce a decent scale cutaway drawing of a complete Saturn V, including the LOX tunnels running through the SI-C fuel tank, the helium bottles inside the LOX tank, the ullage motors, the fuel line fairings on the S-II, umbilical connection points, engines and so on. I can also tell you how they assembled some parts of it. I am enough of a fan of a particular British TV show that has been running since 1963 to list every episode title and who the lead actors were in each case. I am a professional scientist and can produce a number of chemical structures such as cholesterol from memory. Does that make my memory exceptional? Are there no interests of yours about which you can produce great amounts of information from memory?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 4, 2010 17:39:02 GMT -4
I am enough of a fan of a particular British TV show that has been running since 1963 to list every episode title and who the lead actors were in each case. Really - how about the second serial in 1978?
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 4, 2010 17:57:49 GMT -4
I am enough of a fan of a particular British TV show that has been running since 1963 to list every episode title and who the lead actors were in each case. Really - how about the second serial in 1978? That'd be Season 16 starring Tom Baker and Mary Tamm, with John Leeson as the voice of K-9. Not that I remembered this stuff, my skill is knowing where to find the information I need.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Feb 4, 2010 18:07:32 GMT -4
To be specific, the second serial of season 16 would be The Pirate Planet.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 4, 2010 18:15:49 GMT -4
To be specific, the second serial of season 16 would be The Pirate Planet. Ahh, misread you, actually the second serial of 1978 would have been in Season 15, it first aired on Feb 4th and was The Invasion of time. But yes, the second serial of Season 16 was The Pirate Planet, that screen on the 30th Sept though.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Feb 4, 2010 18:22:35 GMT -4
I'm afraid I must be a pedant here. While the second serial of season 16 is indeed The Pirate Planet, the seasons at that time straddled the Christmas and New Year period, and season 16 started in the later part of 1978. (I must confess to having to double check the precise transmission dates here, but I never claimed to be able to the date every episode, just to name them! ) The second serial of 1978 was actually the final serial of season 15, which was The Invasion of Time starring Tom Baker as the Doctor, Louse Jameson as Leela, and John Leeson as the voice of K9. It was also notable for some very bad tinfoil aliens (quite apt for this thread!) and a cockney Sontaran.... Meanwhile, back on topic....
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Feb 4, 2010 18:40:09 GMT -4
Really - how about the second serial in 1978? That'd be Season 16 starring Tom Baker and Mary Tamm, with John Leeson as the voice of K-9. Not that I remembered this stuff, my skill is knowing where to find the information I need. Okay, okay - I've been here awhile but this is the most amazing thing I've come across so far...
|
|
|
Post by drewid on Feb 4, 2010 18:57:53 GMT -4
Really - how about the second serial in 1978? That'd be Season 16 starring Tom Baker and Mary Tamm, with John Leeson as the voice of K-9. Not that I remembered this stuff, my skill is knowing where to find the information I need. Script editor - Douglas Adams, (who also wrote "Pirate Planet").
|
|