|
Post by 20469 on Nov 29, 2006 6:10:33 GMT -4
How about answering my questions?
Does that not look like sticky tape badly applied and scrunched up on the decal does the decal look bowed as if it is partly comming off. So we are going to send the last moon lander to the moon and I want to have the symbol of america on the side the stars and stripes and UNITED STATES proudly blazened on the side. I know i got an old roll of selotape and I am in a rush think ill just slap it on. Hope it dont fall off. and ruin the photos.
Seems belivable to me?
|
|
|
Post by 20469 on Nov 29, 2006 6:31:37 GMT -4
I would definetly have done a better job of sticking on the decal The more surface area you stick the better it will stick The tape aint doing the job.
It looks carp so it must be real? they would have done a better job if they had faked it? Hard to belive they would have done such a bad job even on a mock up. I would hope they would make a better job of the real thing than a mock up or a fake.
All off the protecive foil sheilding etc could have got ripped of and it would have made no difference? So why put it on in the first place?
Some sign of splatter from the moon surface should be evident. I have seen a photo where a lander foot is buried in the soil from impact and a little dust in a foor pad. But not enough to match what should have occured. Even a harrier jump jet gets covered in muck when landing on a dirt surface,
|
|
|
Post by 3onthetree on Nov 29, 2006 7:01:16 GMT -4
Hello 20469. I agree with you, they should have stuck with their initial Thunderbird 1 type design. No tape needed on this baby. In fact I reckon you could even get a machine gun in there some place.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Nov 29, 2006 7:08:02 GMT -4
Does that not look like sticky tape
Yes.
badly applied and scrunched up on the decal
Can't see that it looks particularly badly applied, myself.
does the decal look bowed as if it is partly comming off.
No, it looks like it has been stuck an a surface that is not flat and rigid, such as, oh I don't know, a mlar foil covering. Oh no, wait a minute, that's exactly what the descent stage was covered in.
The descent stage is a framework covered in several layers of mylar foil for thermal regulation, It has no rigid walls. The pallettes containing experiments and the rover are slotted in between the framework.
I know i got an old roll of selotape and I am in a rush
For the umpttenth time, it is not sellotape but kapton tape, made for an entirely different purpose.
I would definetly have done a better job of sticking on the decal
Good for you. No-one else is under any obligation to share your aesthetic sense of decal application.
The tape aint doing the job.
See above. The tape is doing exactly what is was meant to do.
All off the protecive foil sheilding etc could have got ripped of and it would have made no difference?
That is not what I said at all. I said that entire surface could be ripped off and the LM would still function, not that it would make no difference. The loss of that outer skin would not be immediately catastrophic. There would be some thermal regulation problems, and the risk of damage from micrometeoroid impact is greater. However, it will still hold pressure in the cabin, the engines will still work, and the onboard computer will still do its thing. It would not be advisable to stay in space too long in that condition, but nor would it be immediately fatal.
That is why it is not particularly significant that it is bowed and dented.
Some sign of splatter from the moon surface should be evident. I have seen a photo where a lander foot is buried in the soil from impact and a little dust in a foor pad. But not enough to match what should have occured.
PLease feel free to tell us what shuld have occurred, exactly, describing how the exhaust impinges on the surface and how any dust caught up in the flow would behave.
Even a harrier jump jet gets covered in muck when landing on a dirt surface,
Yes, but the dust billows around the harrier because the exhaust and the atmosphere combine to produce vortices and great big clouds of dust. There is no atmosphere on the Moon, therefore nothing whatsoever to create a big billowing cloud. The exhaust hits the surface and moves outwards, blowing dust away from the LM. There is no mechanism for the dust to reverse direction and end up on the LM.
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Nov 29, 2006 7:08:51 GMT -4
Hello 20469. I agree with you, they should have stuck with their initial Thunderbird 1 type design. No tape needed on this baby. In fact I reckon you could even get a machine gun in there some place. Then if they were going to hoax it why not use that design rather than what has to be the ugliest and most implusible looking flying vehicle ever made? If something has to fool people into thinking its a rocket rather than actually being functional why not make it look more like a rocket than the just plain ugly and weird looking but extremely functional and very well designed for its operational enviroment LM?
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Nov 29, 2006 7:13:03 GMT -4
Well that's new a hoax proponent demanding their questions answered.
The writing style and paragraph structure looks ver, very familiar to me.
20469 how about looking up the thread which covered this topic over the course of over 10 pages. It will save you typing.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Nov 29, 2006 7:14:53 GMT -4
A Harrier flies in atmosphere. The LM did not.
The problem here is that you are establishing expectations that don't agree with reality, then proceeding as if those expectations were meaningful. The decal was functional, the tape and the application thereof sufficient. What you suggest (what you describe as a "neat" job) was not necessary, may have been un-necessarily difficult, and might even have been counter-productive. Would you have them smooth out the gold foil as well, getting rid of all those unsightly crinkles?
Would you come to my workplace and argue that we are doing substandard work by not flush-trimming bracing, and allowing holidays to show in the paint? Or would you perhaps understand that the realities of my workplace mean that those changes would waste material and time and deliver no tangible improvement to the functionality of the final product?
And you still fail to understand the world of difference between Kapton tape -- indeed, the whole field of industrial adhesives -- and what you insist as perceiving as some sort of Sello-tape. That tape was stronger than rivets would have been. Stronger than bolts, even (as it did not introduce voids and weak points into the materials involved). Neither flag nor foil was in danger of falling off.
(And to return to my first comment...falling off from WHAT? No air, remember? Nothing out there to brush against either. So the only force on that tape is acceleration; the only thing that could yank that flag "decal" off would be the LM violently accelerating in the other direction. Check out the specs on the engine if you think that is a danger!)
((Okay, and this is probably a bit too advanced for you at the moment, but the stresses that tape connection had to deal with were mostly thermal -- for which tape was a better solution. Plus, that Kapton stuff is durn near immune to radiation -- and I don't know about UV resistance but I would not be at all surprised. In all these areas some industrial binder on a plastic film jacket totally beats out a bit of threaded steel poked through a hole.)
|
|
|
Post by 20469 on Nov 29, 2006 7:37:47 GMT -4
The tape on the top and bottom defintly looks like its comming off. So what ever tape they used it was comming off.
The bowed effect could be due to it being attached to a lose covering. This uneven look can been seen in other decals. The area behind is black and not gold or gray and looks like the hardboard panels that are flat as aposed to the grey canvas panels or gold foil (yes that is not the exact materials they used)
As for splatter. One of Newtons laws of motion is that for every action there is a equall and opposite reaction. so with no atmospher the rocket blast hitting the moon surface woold cause any thing that could be moved by the force of the rocket to be repelled away from the surface. thus hitting the lander.
|
|
|
Post by 3onthetree on Nov 29, 2006 7:43:16 GMT -4
Hello 20469. I agree with you, they should have stuck with their initial Thunderbird 1 type design. No tape needed on this baby. In fact I reckon you could even get a machine gun in there some place. Then if they were going to hoax it why not use that design rather than what has to be the ugliest and most implusible looking flying vehicle ever made? If something has to fool people into thinking its a rocket rather than actually being functional why not make it look more like a rocket than the just plain ugly and weird looking but extremely functional and very well designed for its operational enviroment LM? Just a guess but I'd say Television ratings. Lost in Space was far more popular than the Thunderbirds in the USA. They went for the space pod look instead of the sleek lines of the Thunderbird craft. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Nov 29, 2006 8:01:16 GMT -4
The bowed effect could be due to it being attached to a lose covering. This uneven look can been seen in other decals. The area behind is black and not gold or gray and looks like the hardboard panels that are flat as aposed to the grey canvas panels or gold foil
It doesn't look flat to me. And the gold foil often does look black, since it is highly specular and reflects the black sky just as well as anything else.
As for splatter. One of Newtons laws of motion is that for every action there is a equall and opposite reaction. so with no atmospher the rocket blast hitting the moon surface woold cause any thing that could be moved by the force of the rocket to be repelled away from the surface. thus hitting the lander.
Ever run a tap into a sink at a steady rate (i.e. with a constant stream instead of a gushing one)? The water tends to move out across the surface, only gathering into turbulent areas when it encounters the sides of the sink. It doesn't fly up and hit the tap. Does that violate Newton's laws of motion?
|
|
|
Post by james on Nov 29, 2006 8:04:00 GMT -4
Hope it dont fall off. and ruin the photos.Don't worry, it didn't www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a17/20116870.jpgI remember a time when HB's would at least try harder at arguing against the moon landings. Now we're down to discussing the finer details of decal application? Oh my...
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Nov 29, 2006 8:31:30 GMT -4
20469, did you even bother to check that link I posted? www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/Publications/GEO_Brochure.pdf Similar foil covering to that of the LM is used on most communications satellites these days, for the same reason of thermal control. Tape is frequently used to hold it together. You are arguing against a standard technique used in the industry. Why do you think you know better than people who actually build satellites?
|
|
|
Post by 20469 on Nov 29, 2006 8:34:13 GMT -4
As for the gold looking black due to reflecting the black sky this sun is on the opposite side. I do not think you could argue the the refelected light of the surface or space suite could cause the gold to refelect the sky.
As for water and constant flow.There will be some water repelled from the surface. As the water first hits this will be more. The water will then trap the water being repelled. Open a tap full and watch your clothes get wet.
As for why it matters. The devil is in the detail.
There is much debate about the lack of crater I notice in AS-11-50-5864 and area just to the right of the slighlty discollered ground and radiating soil that looks like it could be a small blast crater. The lander did not land vertically so this might make sense. Although the landing probe on the foot appears to be bent in the wrong direction for the travel.
There is little other obvius evidence that a landing of a rocket even a small one in low gravity has occured. that decal looks like its about 12 inches above the descent engine. They realy must have used good tape.
The
|
|
|
Post by dwight on Nov 29, 2006 8:38:05 GMT -4
I'm betting around 25 pages of thread. any one care to up the ante?
|
|
|
Post by 20469 on Nov 29, 2006 8:57:02 GMT -4
Staelites use foil and tape. When they take off they are protected by nose cone's and they never have to land. They just burn up when they drop out of orbit.
It is interesting that having first sent a orbit mission around the moon they did not do a dummy run of landing and having take off an umaned module under remote control to se if it would work. The russians tried it to grab some rocks but it failed. guess they must have wanted to win the race realy bad and were willing to risk it all. Even though the russions major take of pad hade alredy blown up. So no need to rush anymore?.
|
|