|
Post by astronaut23 on Nov 14, 2010 14:28:05 GMT -4
Thanks thats what I thought that the CM pilot actually did the actual contact and capture from the command module even if the LM was the active vehicle during most of the rendezvous.
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Nov 11, 2010 11:31:39 GMT -4
The LM was the active vehicle in LOR because its guidance platform was better. It had finer-grained accelerometers that gave better intermediate solutions to the rendezvous steps. Ok, but they didn't actually make the dock did they. The CM pilot actually always made the dock from the CM right?
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 24, 2010 3:43:18 GMT -4
The good thing on Apollo is they didn't have clearance issues when leaving the moon. In fact Buzz Aldrin said, "Rodger understand, we're number 1 on the runway". ;D
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 23, 2010 20:10:02 GMT -4
Well the lunar module actually had a small docking window in the top of it but I don't think the lunar module was ever the active craft during the docking was is? It was always the command module pilot making the dock from the command module?
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 23, 2010 17:01:35 GMT -4
Didn't that movie also confirm that the boosters and external tank are all jetisoned at the same time?
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 23, 2010 13:52:34 GMT -4
Not much more different than most other government opertations I guess. Although when the military or some other organization wastes a bunch of money they can better deal with it as they get a whole lot more to start with. And no I'm not sayiing we don't need a military. Just that if they do something stupid financially it doesn't really hit them all that hard like it would NASA.
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 23, 2010 5:20:00 GMT -4
On Apollo's docking system whenever they transfered between the vehicles they had to remove the probe by hand right completly? So when the two got into the LM before going down to the moon the Command Module Pilot had to put the probe back in the tunnel before closing his door right?
So anyway after the lunar landing and rendevous and docking and after another transfer again of taking the probe out of the tunnel did they put the probe back in before the final undocking which blew away the docking system itself? The probe was attached to the part of the command module docking ring that was jetisoned on final undock? Or did they leave the probe actually inside the lunar module itself. And also is did they use the final undock of the LM like the space station does with Progresses when they are through with them. Did they throw everything like the trash they had accumulated so far in the mission behind in the LM. Seems like it would be a good way to get rid of everything in the Command module you don't want to haul back to earth with you.
Ok its a lot of questions. LOL. Just really curious about all this.
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 23, 2010 5:10:13 GMT -4
Imagine the kind of station we could have built if we had kept the Saturn V around and the money was spent to build the station modules. You could have a central hub and attatch Skylab size modules to it all launched by the Saturn V in much fewer launches than the ISS and have a bigger station too.
Skylab is impressive when you look at the internal volume they had to float and play around in. I love the video of the Skylab resisdents running around the walls of the station and doing sumersaults along it.
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 21, 2010 8:37:04 GMT -4
I´ve been to the Airport in Frankfurt/Germany yesterday with my wife`n kids to make a little tour towards the airfield to see the A380 and stuff. Before that, we went to McDonalds and there was an elderly couple sitting-arround their seventies I guess-and a conversation evolved(because my little son-one year old- is of course a smile magnet). I´m always keen on talking with people which were arround during this fantastic Apollo era to listen to their remarks and they were obviously impressed by the amount of data that I was putting out to them. The reaction of the woman was absolutely predictable , because she didnt know most of the names after Neil Armstrong, not even Allan Shepard... and with that she showed clearly why the whole thing was stopped: nobody cared anymore after A11! But on the other side it showed clear as a bell that it was normal to have people on the moon at that time! But back to topic: superb vid! Hey, I care. I've always been a big fan of the space program and I was born in 77 after Apollo was all over with.
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 9, 2010 23:41:35 GMT -4
I heard a funny one the other day. On youtube someone posted that if you believe men could go to the moon then you would need 2 football field size fuel tanks more of fuel than they had? I think I've realized that hoax believers don't understand the physics of spaceflight. No wonder they can't believe. They think they have to burn the engines all the way to the moon and back just like a plane or car? They don't realize that they coasted 99% of the time?
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 9, 2010 23:33:31 GMT -4
Thats funny. I guess the moon hoax crowd thinks rockets are supposed to just go straight up until fuel burnout with no pitchover.
Just like the stupid stars thing you can show it in pictures that have to do with other missions. I've seen pictures of the black sky in photos that show the ISS in orbit and guess what no stars. ISS must be fake too.
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 7, 2010 13:35:58 GMT -4
"From the Earth to the Moon" is a pretty good miniseries shot on the Apollo program and uses modern filming techniques that they didn't have in the 70's and it doesn't look anything like real EVA footage. They had computer graphics and blue screens to create moonscapes.
They even did what HB's accuse NASA of they hung actors on wires from helium ballons to relieve the weight. Still doesn't look anything real.
Its simply laughable that anybody can think they had the movie tech now or even then to falsify hours upon hours of Apollo footage and have it all look real. Especially when you look at state of the art movie making in the late 1960's early 1970's. Does the spaceflight or the astronauts in 2001: A space Odyssy look anything like real?
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 7, 2010 8:13:48 GMT -4
Can an HB provide one plausible explanation for how to shoot hours upon hours of video footage in an Earth environment and make all the dust kicked up by astronauts, the rover, all the objects thrown, dropped, etc etc etc look like it was filmed in a 1/6 g vacuum environment on the moon? No they cannot. Their stupid film filmed at half speed argument looks ridiculous when speed up over the course of Apollo EVA footage. The truth is they like to cherry pick certain segments of footage without a lot of movement to show speed up. But if you look at the whole thing speedup up you realize theres not way you could have shot that at full speed then run it at half speed to create the moon footage. Check out the video below. It illustrates this perfectly. I especially love the footage form Apollo 16 and 17. Really shows the ridiculousness of it. The TV was getting real good by those missions. www.youtube.com/user/BlisterHiker#p/a/u/0/JBICR4PTLfc
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 7, 2010 7:19:12 GMT -4
Yeah, I guess your right. Like you can see the SRB's really burning on the shuttle but the main engines once they get up to full power are pretty hard to see the plumes even at ground level.
You can see the 3 white circles on the back of the shuttle stack even when its high up in the flight but we got a lot better tracking cams now than they did in the Saturn V days.
I'd love to have a modern HD video of a Saturn V launch. ;D
I knew the upper stages burned hydrogen while the first stage was kerosene. But what is the stuff that continues to come out of the engines after shutdown? The engines keep venting fuel after shutdown or what?
|
|
|
Post by astronaut23 on Oct 7, 2010 7:15:44 GMT -4
1977 the year Enterprise took her first test flights. LOL.
I've always been a big fan of the space program since when I was a kid. I kinda wished I'd been alive to see Apollo when it was all happening live. What a thrill. The greatest adventure on which man has every embarked. Pity, that we quit going, IMO.
|
|