Pokrovsky theory Oct 31, 2011 11:42:56 GMT -4
Post by JayUtah on Oct 31, 2011 11:42:56 GMT -4
No, the "whole NASA saga" is founded upon a mountain of evidence, only one rock of which is Saturn V performance. It is invalid to attempt to reduce a large historical question to one "bellwether" examination.
Your analysis of Saturn V performance fails for a number of reasons that have been explained to you.
...the rocket plunges into a cirrostratus cloud
Along what precise trajectory?
How would it be possible to reach the orbit from about 15-20 km if you are not going upwards anymore?
Do you really understand so little of launch trajectories?
Okay, I'm a professional engineer working in aerospace. Rocket performance is part of what I do for a living. Also, part of my training includes forensic engineering (not all engineers study this), which includes photo analysis techniques.
It seems that you and the authors upon which you rely have made a number of simplifying assumptions that actually pose a grave challenge to the validity of your method and therefore the reliability of your findings. Is it any wonder that you get the wrong answer?
Until you can provide some serious validation of your method, the difference between your findings and those of others is far more likely to be caused by the error in your method than by some supposed hoax on NASA's part.