Speeding Along Now
Posted 05 July 2019 - 08:09 PM
This is an entertaining read: http://centerforanin...m/moondoggie-1/
Even though I did not work on Apollo, I disagree with the article in many ways. However, the author makes a point that I believe is very correct when he says: ...
The article has 14 chapters (see the links at the bottom) and the author raises some very difficult questions that I have never seen adequately answered.
Speeding Along Now
TMF Admin
Posted 20 July 2019 - 05:57 PM
Speeding Along Now
Posted 20 July 2019 - 07:02 PM
Why are NASA scientists still trying to solve the problem of traversing the Van Allen Belts if we've already done it? Why are we still trying to figure out how to leave low Earth orbit if it's been done already? These are the questions posed by NASA scientists in the above posted video recently. I'd love to hear a coherent explanation. The flat Earth BS is a nice distraction.
Moved Into The Garage
Posted 22 July 2019 - 07:02 PM
Lunar lift-off
Half a century on from the Apollo missions, plans are indeed advanced to send men (and probably women as well, this time) to the Moon, with several organisations now trying to design missions.
While Apollo was the watchword for the first lunar missions launched by NASA, the second iteration of government-backed crewed Moon journeys will carry a different name: Artemis.
It’s a fitting name; in Greek mythology, Artemis was the twin sister of Apollo. While Apollo was a solar deity, Artemis was always associated with the Moon.
The Apollo LM is so far the only vehicle to have ever taken humans onto the moon and was developed and built by Grumman Aerospace, now part of Northrop Grumman. The company won the contract after 11 companies were invited to bid, with the process beginning in 1962. Once again, the builder of the Artemis LM will be decided by a competitive bidding process. This began in May of this year, making the deadline somewhat quicker than in Apollo’s case. Again, 11 companies have been invited to conduct studies and select prototypes for a prospective lander.
Artemis-1 is scheduled for July 2020: it will be the first flight of Orion atop the new space launch system (SLS) rocket, based on systems originally developed for the Space Shuttle. It will be a 10-day mission that will catapult an empty Orion capsule around the moon, returning directly to earth. Artemis-2, scheduled for 2022, will be another SLS launch, this time sending a crew on a lunar orbital trip (this would be the equivalent of 1968’s Apollo 8 mission, which was the third flight of the Saturn V launcher).
Scheduled to launch in 2024, Artemis-3 will send a crew in an Orion module to rendezvous with the Deep Space Gateway (DSG) space station where its crew will transfer into the lunar modules. These will be launched to lunar orbit, from where the descent and return modules will detach to take the crew to the Moon’s surface. The landing site is currently planned to be near the lunar south pole, a location of intense interest because it is believed to harbour water ice deposits in sections of craters that are in permanent shade, where temperatures drop are continuously below -100°C.
As with Apollo, the descent module will remain on the moon, while the return module will detach to dock with the transfer module in orbit. The return and transfer modules will fly back to the DSG. The crew will then disembark from their lunar shuttle back into Orion, which will return them to Earth. This differs somewhat from the Apollo approach, which used the conical command module and its attached cylindrical service module as the vehicle to go all the way from Earth into lunar orbit. For Artemis, the command and service modules for crewed missions will not go to the Moon, and there will be no need for the Artemis-3 SLS to also carry a LM (lunar module), as was the case with Apollo. This will save on its launch weight.
The Full Article in 'The Engineer' magazine here:-
https://www.theengin...nar-lift-off-2/
Edited by mab01uk, 22 July 2019 - 07:20 PM.
Moved Into The Garage
Posted 22 July 2019 - 07:10 PM
Last Man on the Moon 1972 (Harrison Schmitt - Apollo 17) confident humans will visit Mars
Edited by mab01uk, 22 July 2019 - 07:13 PM.
Moved Into The Garage
Posted 05 August 2019 - 05:27 AM
The Apollo LM is so far the only vehicle to have ever taken humans onto the moon and was developed and built by Grumman Aerospace,
Possibly getting a little off topic, however, I have read A book on the LM written by the Engineer in charge of that project, Tom Kelly. Incredible story, they had their highs that everyone knows about of course, but they also had some very low periods and in some unexpected ways.
I probably sound like a broken record, but I'm in total and utter awe of what all these engineers did and did so well in the whole Mercury / Gemini / Apollo Programs. That it was so difficult (and expensive) is highlighted by the fact that this has never been done since.
Moved Into The Garage
Posted 05 August 2019 - 04:19 PM
The recent repeat of 'James May on the Moon' is well worth watching - 9 Days left to view on BBC iPlayer for UK viewers:-
https://www.bbc.co.u...rammes/b00lfdbv
Moved Into The Garage
Posted 07 August 2019 - 08:12 PM
To give a 'hint' as to just how difficult and complicated the hardware and it's development was, here's a clip that discusses one, over overlooked, component of the Saturn Rocket
With what this component does and controls, first the issues had to be found, many if these by exhaustive testing. It also shows why for many aspects, an 'incremental' approach was the only way they could progress, ie, some issues were foresawn, but until those before it were resolved, the next round of issues couldn't be addressed as those sorted prior would have an impact on the next and some would end up in a loop !
To go from an idea to a result and everything in between with no precedence to follow in the time frame that it was all done in, is nothing short of remarkable.
One Carb Or Two?
Posted 08 August 2019 - 05:22 PM
Moved Into The Garage
Posted 08 August 2019 - 05:41 PM
We are still designing and delivering truly inspiring engineering projects (admitedly not quite the Apollo programme) but they don't seem to capture the public imagination, or are reported in the media, in the same way as they did in the past.
Sadly one of the reasons there is a shortage of Engineers in the UK is because few children growing up or attending school have access to 'old fashioned' practical subjects like woodwork or metalwork anymore to know what an engineering job or project involves, plus few companies have been encouraged to inspire or fund training for young people into engineering as a career choice for many years. Now most youngsters seem to be encouraged to go to University to study easier non-engineering subjects (or desire to be a reality TV star 
).......while we have to recruit many of our skilled Engineers from other countries.
Some interesting videos on the London Crossrail project here:-
https://www.youtube....6YRqDkStWB94DPQ
Building Britain's Biggest Warship: On Board HMS Prince Of Wales
Building of Astute Class Submarine)
Edited by mab01uk, 08 August 2019 - 06:17 PM.
Up Into Fourth
Posted 08 August 2019 - 07:27 PM
Why are NASA scientists still trying to solve the problem of traversing the Van Allen Belts if we've already done it? Why are we still trying to figure out how to leave low Earth orbit if it's been done already? These are the questions posed by NASA scientists in the above posted video recently. I'd love to hear a coherent explanation. The flat Earth BS is a nice distraction.
what's particularly laughable about that offering is that unlike the the-moon-landing-were-faked-conspiracy variety, this one appears to make the claim that because temperatures in the thermosphere exceed the melting temperatures of what most spacecraft are typically made of, they'd all be destroyed. if that were the case, then pretty much every single claimed launch into low earth orbit or beyond since sputnik would have to have been faked; voyager 1& 2 missions have been faked for the last 42 years (..and counting..), spacelab, mir, the entire space shuttle programme (..don't forget Challenger and Columbia failures would have to have been faked) ISS, hubble, sat-nav, sat-phones, sat-imagery, satellite tv. none of it happened or exists in the way that it's claimed
very amateurish bit of misrepresentation going on there with regard to leaving low earth orbit - it's seems fairly apparent to me that the clips of what would appear to be bona fide NASA staff (..i don't include the first clip..) are all of people saying that we don't currently have anything capable of leaving low earth orbit, not that it can't be done; the clip of Don Pettit they've chosen to use for apparently humorous purposes makes that point fairly unambiguously. it should also be fairly obvious that they're all referring to manned missions leaving low earth orbit, as i'm pretty sure that within recent memory there's been a quite few payloads delivered to places beyond earth orbit such as the moon, mars and some outlying asteroids.
..as for the Van Allen belts - according to the wikipedia entry they're apparently not much of an issue 'til 600 miles out, so as we can't get more 400miles without melting i'd think that's pretty low down the list of problems to worry about
Moved Into The Garage
Posted 08 August 2019 - 09:44 PM
Sadly one of the reasons there is a shortage of Engineers in the UK is because few children growing up or attending school have access to 'old fashioned' practical subjects like woodwork or metalwork anymore to know what an engineering job or project involves, plus few companies have been encouraged to inspire or fund training for young people into engineering as a career choice for many years. Now most youngsters seem to be encouraged to go to University to study easier non-engineering subjects (or desire to be a reality TV star
There's a world wide shortage of Engineers and Tradespeople and it won't be 'fixed' anytime soon.
One major contributing factor here has been the Privatisation of Government Utilities, like the Electricity, Railway and Telecommunications outfits.
Private enterprise have offloaded their tradespeople and subcontracted this aspect out, often to micro-operators, who work 1 and 2 out and any not in a position or interested in taking on apprentices and trainees.
One of our Electricity Companies sent an Engineer and an assistant to the UK a few years back, to set up a shop front and entice local engineers and tradepeople to come to Australia and work for them. In the Airport, they passed another guy they knew from Ireland, who was on his way to Australia to do the same thing!
After a short while, the Australian outfit got settled in their shop front only to discover a few doors down was another (opposition) Australian Electricity company who had already been there for 6 months prior doing the same thing!
It's madness.
Speeding Along Now
Posted 10 August 2019 - 02:00 AM
Why are NASA scientists still trying to solve the problem of traversing the Van Allen Belts if we've already done it? Why are we still trying to figure out how to leave low Earth orbit if it's been done already? These are the questions posed by NASA scientists in the above posted video recently. I'd love to hear a coherent explanation. The flat Earth BS is a nice distraction.
what's particularly laughable about that offering is that unlike the the-moon-landing-were-faked-conspiracy variety, this one appears to make the claim that because temperatures in the thermosphere exceed the melting temperatures of what most spacecraft are typically made of, they'd all be destroyed. if that were the case, then pretty much every single claimed launch into low earth orbit or beyond since sputnik would have to have been faked; voyager 1& 2 missions have been faked for the last 42 years (..and counting..), spacelab, mir, the entire space shuttle programme (..don't forget Challenger and Columbia failures would have to have been faked) ISS, hubble, sat-nav, sat-phones, sat-imagery, satellite tv. none of it happened or exists in the way that it's claimed...
The thermosphere can reach 2500 degrees Celsius, but like the heat on the Moon, it's more of a technical point than a practical one because there's no conductive medium to transfer the heat. That's a flaw in Dave McGowan's article as well. However, the challenges of radiation acting on humans outside of low Earth orbit are extremely difficult and I don't believe that they have been met yet. For a more involved analysis, see this: https://www.vinnysbl...ned_america.pdf
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
