|
|
Post by sts60 on Jul 8, 2011 7:12:03 GMT -4
...Let's say he's sitting in seat 25E on an airplane flying over the Atlantic Ocean when a call for a doctor comes over the PA system. He pushes his call button and is told that the passenger in seat 15F may be having a heart attack. Will our intrepid doctor insist on first speaking with the captain and being told the absolute latitude and longitude of their plane to say, 1 foot accuracy before he can find the passenger in seat 15F? A good analogy, but fattydash is claiming - with no understanding of the subject, no idea of what accuracy would be required, and no explanation for the actual Apollo record (other than calling a lot of people liars) - that because this airplane is flying in pre-GPS times, that because they didn't know its position exactly, the whole flight was faked - clearly it could never have found its destination. This is really a two-part claim: first, yet another appeal to "if I ran the zoo", regarding the retroreflector ranging attempts. Second, a claim (implied, I think - I would need to doublecheck the thread to be sure, but have other things to do now) that the LM couldn't have found its way back to the CM because there landing location wasn't within some range. When fattydash can provide an actual numerical analysis showing they didn't have the combined delta-V (remember, both the LM and the CM could maneuver for LOR) to successfully rendezvous because the known* landing site was outside an acceptable range, then he has the makings of a real claim. Until then, it's just another layman waving his arms to support his convictions about Apollo, even though his previous attempts never amounted to anything. |
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 8, 2011 7:19:54 GMT -4
Jason, with regard to the beginning of #87
Houston cannot locate the Eagle. They do not have the appropriate equipment to find the bird at its perch, 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E. Collins gave it a shot, he could not find the Eagle. That leaves only Armstrong and Aldrin. Process of elimination in a sense. They better hope that they can find 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E or they are not rendezvousing with Collins.
That said, it turns out no one did know where they were. According to the oficial story, not Houston, not Collins, not the astronauts themselves. I offer the Apollo 11 transcripts, Mission Report, debriefing report , press conference report as my references. All by NASA itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Jul 8, 2011 7:25:39 GMT -4
They were not lost, how many times etc etc. They were on the moon, does not sound like they were lost, they knew how to get off and re join Collins. They could speak to them. Look at the mission requirements. Land, pick up a bit of dirt, plonk an experiment or two and get out. It did not say if Collins could not see you can you go to the nearest hill and wave. The laser ranging experiment is simple. Drop it and go. You build it into something it was not meant to do.
Now, what do you propose they could do about if they could not find them. Rescue them?
How did they fake it? Come on, you have tried to make out it was faked, accused the people taking part as nefarious dudes, how did they fake it?
|
|
|
|
Post by fattydash on Jul 8, 2011 7:30:30 GMT -4
sts60
As regards your statement, response above, the accuracy issue I am investigating. I have no library here with me now. That said, I would remind you, and as I have mentioned previously, this is an issue that cannot be overemphasized, the astronauts, the alleged astronauts are the only ones anyway with any capability of locating the Eagle's position on the surface of the moon and so it had better be good enough, or the boys at Tranquility Base wouldn't be able to make it back to Collins and home.
I respect the question about about the accuracy, but any official story must also feature the astronauts locating themselves on the surface of the moon prior to hooking up with Columbia. The astronauts in the official story version are every bit as dependent on LM navigational equipment accuracy in moon coordinate finding, as astronauts in any HB or whatever imagined version one may propose. There is no one else but the astronauts themselves with the capability of determining the Eagle's position.
I have of course stressed in my thread that the official story, while requiring Aldrin/Armstrong to find themselves in order to begin their navigation back to Collins, forget to tell the guys operating the Lick laser where to find the LRRR. Additionally, they somehow seemed to have found themselves back to Collins miraculously, a "miraculous rendezvous". As another feature of the official story, an important one, is that the coordinates of Tranquility Base, the Eagle's perch, well that wasn't known until 08/01/1969.
How is all of this nonsense possible? Well it never happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by trebor on Jul 8, 2011 7:32:58 GMT -4
I respect the question about about the accuracy, but any official story must feature the astronauts as well locating themselves on the surface of the moon prior to hooking up with Columbia. There have been some good posts here about how that was done. Have you not read them? I have of course stressed in my thread that the official story, while requiring Aldrin/Armstrong to find themselves in order to begin their navigation back to Collins, Apparently not. Here is part of one post you did not read, perhaps you should try addressing it. I can hear 'fattydash' saying "How could Eagle possibly have landed and returned to Columbia given all this inaccurate tracking?" Good question. The short answer was that absolute accuracy was not nearly as important as relative accuracy. Eagle had a landing radar that provided accurate measurements of altitude and velocity with respect to the moon. This was a critical piece of equipment for the actual landing, as the radio-tracking-based estimates were then typically several thousand feet off -- much too great when you need to know your altitude to a few feet or less. But it's important to remember that the landing radar could not determine -- nor did it need to determine -- the LM's absolute position on the moon. To facilitate rendezvous Eagle and Columbia had several ways to track each other. Eagle had a rendezvous radar (the dish on top of its "nose") that operated through a transponder on Columbia. As a backup, Columbia could measure range and range rate to Eagle through the VHF voice radios, albeit less accurately than Eagle's rendezvous radar. And they could sight each other through the same optical instruments used to align the inertial reference platform. It's important to understand that these were relative measurements. Eagle and Columbia could determine their positions relative to each other far more accurately than either could determine its position relative to the moon. But accurate relative measurements are what count in rendezvous. So the Eagle was hardly "lost" when it landed. Its approximate landed location was immediately determined by means of earth tracking and the on-board navigation system, but the absolute accuracy of these estimates was too poor to enable Collins to sight Eagle from orbit, or for the laser ranging stations on earth to quickly locate the Apollo 11 LRRR. Eventually, Eagle's exact landing site was accurately determined by analysis of the movie film taken during the descent and this enabled the lunar ranging observatory to find the reflector. But this obviously had to wait until the film could be returned to earth, processed and analyzed. Yet another red herring from the hoax crowd goes up in flames. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jul 8, 2011 7:33:39 GMT -4
They better hope that they can find 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E or they are not rendezvousing with Collins. Why not? Do you understand the concept of error margins and the ability of the LM to use its radar to find Collins in the CSm and fly to him that way? They did not know precisely where they were. They did know approximately where they were. Thanks to the rendezvous radar they did know precisely where the CSM was, and they knew approximately where to head in order to meet him before they lifted off. Orbital mechanics presents a very stringent set of restrictions on where they could have been given where they started their descent from, and the fuel margins would allow for that uncertainty in starting position to allow a rendezvous to take place. So, they launch on what they know to be roughly the right trajectory, then use their rendezvous radar and RCS systems to adjust their course so they can precisely rendezvous with the CSM. Once they get within a certain range they can use their eyes to make the precise rendezvous. And none of them in question. Undertand this: we know and accept that no-one knew the precise location of the Eagle on the lunar surface, only its approximate one. The point is not whether anyone knew, it is whether anyone needed to know that location with any greater precision than it was already known. So far you have yet to prove that point. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jul 8, 2011 7:36:48 GMT -4
any official story must feature the astronauts locating themselves on the surface of the moon prior to hooking up with Columbia. If it was all faked, why did they include something so apparently inconceivable for a real mission? It is not miraculous, and has been explained to you. They knew where to go approximately, and they had a rendezvous radar to locate the precise position. You seem to have this idea in your head that without the precise starting location there was no way for them to know where they were going. That is simply as wrong as it can be. If you're stuck out in the middle of a field and you need to make your way to a large water tower which you know to be somewhere just over the horizon to your east, do you waste your time trying to locate your precise starting position, or do you head due east until the tower appears and then walk towards it? |
|
|
|
Post by Mr Gorsky on Jul 8, 2011 8:20:21 GMT -4
This really is becoming a car crash of a thread.
The basic question has been raised a number of times and gone ignored ... if the lack of precise location for Eagle on the moon is so important to the mission as to be inconceivable then why would NASA build that into their fake mission profile? What benefit would it give them to be unable to find Eagle and the LRRR? If the whole mission was a fraud, then faking that they knew exactly where the LM was should have been an important part of the jigsaw to get right.
Faking such a thing makes no sense whatsoever ... well, faking the moon landing at all makes no sense whatsoever, but faking that particular aspect goes way beyond that.
And for a Doctor, fattydash, you show a remarkable inability to listen to, and learn from, others, as your unwillingness to consider, and comprehend, the importance of relative, as opposed to absolute, positioning in completing the rendezvous with the CSM highlights.
If I am parked in the middle of a car park in Nottingham and need to get home, I do not need to know precisely where I am on the planet. What I need is to know where I am going, and have in my possession something that can guide me to where it is. These days, that is called a smartphone, in days gone by that would have been a map and road signs confirming I was on the correct route.
For Apollo 11, the CSM and LM ascent stage had built in hardware to guide them precisely to each others' locations in space ... it made no difference whatsoever where they started from, the two vehicles knew exactly how to find each other and, for a rendezvous, that is really all that is required.
|
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Jul 8, 2011 8:27:47 GMT -4
The phrase "if I ran the zoo" comes to mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason Thompson on Jul 8, 2011 8:31:26 GMT -4
It does, but then if I was faking it I wouldn't include something that is supposedly inconceivable for a real mission to include.....
|
|
|
|
Post by tedward on Jul 8, 2011 8:42:40 GMT -4
How is all of this nonsense possible? Well it never happened. Bold statement. Come on, back it up. How did they fake it? You seem to invest time dodging the issue. If you have thought (incorrectly) that there is an issue here I would expect you to look further into the time line to find out how it was done, to see if it was at all feasible. So, how was it done? The info is here from other posters on how it was achieved, you choose to ignore that then elaborate on the hoax please. |
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jul 8, 2011 8:45:29 GMT -4
Fattydash, one of the things I do for a living is spacecraft guidance and control. You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. You've patched together a few isolated concepts into a wrong-headed notion of how it "must" have worked, and when you note that NASA didn't seem able to accomplish your method, you cry fake.
That's a common theme in conspiracy-mongering, so it leads me -- along with other clues -- to conclude that you're no doctor either. And frankly I don't think anyone here or at BAUT ever believed you were. You simply don't display the cognitive ability to receive instruction.
In this thread you're talking to practicing engineers. We do not accept your Googled-up nonsense as a substitution for actual understanding. We have a very low tolerance for pretense as well, so please kindly understand the first thing about orbital rendezvous before you throw around accusations of fraud and hoax.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 8, 2011 9:00:24 GMT -4
Houston cannot locate the Eagle. They do not have the appropriate equipment to find the bird at its perch, 00 41 15 N and 23 26 00 E. Collins gave it a shot, he could not find the Eagle. That leaves only Armstrong and Aldrin. Process of elimination in a sense. Please stop saying that. It's been explained to you that Armstrong and Aldrin were not equipped with the tools necessary to determine their position with an accuracy any better than what was already known. They landed within the landing ellipse and that was good enough. It has been likewise explained to you repeatedly that the accuracy you think was required was not necessary. The rendezvous procedures developed for the mission allowed for error. I summarily dismiss you opinion on the basis that you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. |
|
|
|
Post by fiveonit on Jul 8, 2011 10:42:29 GMT -4
That's a common theme in conspiracy-mongering, ... I think it's referred to as ignorance. (With a hefty helping of arrogance) |
|
|
|
Post by twik on Jul 8, 2011 11:09:06 GMT -4
fattydasher, in response to my question in post #11, you said that there was no Eagle to find. Why, then, wouldn they fake being about to find the Eagle easily, if they were faking the entire thing?
|
|
