It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Whould you get in this if I told you it goes to the moon?

page: 5
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish
a reply to: 0bserver1



You should for once if you own a car strip your doors down until nothing is left and all inside lining striped away.


Here is a question. NASA 'sent a car to the moon'. A moon buggy.

But on mars they could only put a remote controlled 'car'. The Rover.

That looks nothing like this hunk of junk. Nor does the space shuttle.



thats not a question..




posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:14 AM
link   
You would get into it if you were an astronaut at the time and wanted go to the moon. Trust in the engineers. Pictures can be deceiving. Wrapping a pipe or beam with a thin material doesn't make it weaker. Some people might think so though.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:23 AM
link   
They still use foil to deflect heat..It's now used to deflect heat indoor home floors , that keeps the cold from entering your home ..



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:25 AM
link   
What a well thought out argument.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: 0bserver1

Would you live in this house?

Look at that rickety foil wrap, there's no way the roof can stay up!




posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel

Wrapping a pipe or beam with a thin material doesn't make it weaker. Some people might think so though.


Yeah -- I'm not sure why people would think that having reflective tape and reflective foil that lander's leg and struts (to protect wiring and devices that run along those legs and struts) would somehow cause the leg or strut to not work.

It's still a structurally stable leg, whether that structural leg is left bare or if it is wrapped in reflective insulation.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

The OPs view is unique and interesting and IMHO sensical.The OP is simply creating a beginning for discussions.I agree it looks like a joke,if there is water pressure in the oceans which makes us have to build thick walled subs then why doesn the so called "vacume of space" make us do the same,pessure in or pressure out whats the difference?For all we know you can swim in space as long as you hold your breath and there is oxygen and untold numbers of life forms out there that get their oxygen in their own ways, just like in the oceans in the skies and below the soil,judging by how many other lies we have been intentionally fed anything is possible.


OP you might have some fun if you take a deck of cymatics cards and lay it out in front of your monitor then just spend a day surfing Ancient artifacts carvings painting buildings sculptures writings ect ect looking for the sonic patterning to show itself somewhere in your data surfing.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: 3danimator2014

The OPs view is unique and interesting and IMHO sensical.The OP is simply creating a beginning for discussions.I agree it looks like a joke,if there is water pressure in the oceans which makes us have to build thick walled subs then why doesn the so called "vacume of space" make us do the same,pessure in or pressure out whats the difference?For all we know you can swim in space as long as you hold your breath and there is oxygen and untold numbers of life forms out there that get their oxygen in their own ways, just like in the oceans in the skies and below the soil,judging by how many other lies we have been intentionally fed anything is possible.


the problem with the OP's view is that he is failing to understand the difference between aluminum foil used to wrap around the LM in order to deflect sunlight and thinking that the entire LM was built with aluminum foil.

remove the foil wrapping and you would see a spacecraft weighing over 4 tonnes altogether (descent + ascent stages) not flimsy at all.

edit on 5-4-2016 by choos because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: 3danimator2014

The OPs view is unique and interesting and IMHO sensical.The OP is simply creating a beginning for discussions.I agree it looks like a joke,if there is water pressure in the oceans which makes us have to build thick walled subs then why doesn the so called "vacume of space" make us do the same,pessure in or pressure out whats the difference?For all we know you can swim in space as long as you hold your breath and there is oxygen and untold numbers of life forms out there that get their oxygen in their own ways, just like in the oceans in the skies and below the soil,judging by how many other lies we have been intentionally fed anything is possible.


OP you might have some fun if you take a deck of cymatics cards and lay it out in front of your monitor then just spend a day surfing Ancient artifacts carvings painting buildings sculptures writings ect ect looking for the sonic patterning to show itself somewhere in your data surfing.







Ok.




posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:41 AM
link   
OP (ProfessorPatternfish) --

It sounds to me that if the Lunar Module had an smooth outer skin covering the insulating material, then you would probably think it looked spaceworthy.

However, my question to you would be "what purpose would that outer skin serve?", other than making it look smooth and hiding the insulating material?



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People



However, my question to you would be "what purpose would that outer skin serve?", other than making it look smooth and hiding the insulating material?

Why.. it would add weight... Something that the Apollo engineers did NOT want!




posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish
Have a close look and try not to laugh.

It is falling to bits already.

Aluminium foil, warping paper and egg boxes.

I'm sorry but I have to laugh.


files.abovetopsecret.com...




Cant say that they did or didn't but I follow you. There is no way I would hop in this thing. For the amount of money they spent and knowing what kind of pressures and challenges space alone would hold, there is no way I can look at this picture and think "that's a sturdy piece of multi million dollar equipment". I would think that a 13 year olds science project would be more seamless than this priceless piece of space equipment.

I've seen flat bottom aluminum hull boats more seamless than this.

"So let me get this straight. You want me to go out into space strapped to a bomb big enough to take out a mountain, fling through the vastness of space in a contraption where even the smallest of pin holes in my gear could leave me dead in a matter of minutes, swing around the moon in a tin can with less room than a bathroom stall, THEN land on and escape the moon in THAT??? Yeah... umm... you lost me at that"!


edit on 5-4-2016 by StallionDuck because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 08:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: one4all


...if there is water pressure in the oceans which makes us have to build thick walled subs then why doesn the so called "vacume of space" make us do the same,pessure in or pressure out whats the difference?...



The Apollo LM crew cabin was pressurized to 5 psi (pounds per square inch). That means that 5 psi of pressure was pushing outwards while it operated in the vacuum of space. 5 psi is even less than the normal air pressure at seas level on Earth, which is 14.7 psi.

A submarine needs to withstand FAR more than that. Water pressure increases 1 Atmosphere (14.7 psi) for every 33 feet of depth. So a submarine at 1000 feet down needs to withstand about 450 psi of pressure pushing in. A submarine at 2000 feet of depth needs to withstand about 900 psi.

Again, the LM was designed to safely withstand the 5 psi of pressure pushing out (actually, it was designed to safely withstand the 14.7 psi of pressure pushing in on it while sitting in the assembly plant on Earth -- and probably even more than that).


edit on 4/5/2016 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: StallionDuck

I've seen flat bottom aluminum hull boats more seamless than this.

A boat hull would have more external forces acting against it (water drag as it moved through the water, air drag at it moved through the air) than the LM would encounter.

The LM had virtually no drag forces acting on it in the vacuum of space and the near-vacuum of the Moon, so a taped seam does not need to be perfectly smooth.


edit on 4/5/2016 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 09:03 AM
link   
I have a question.

Where are the fuel tanks?

I assume one would need almost as much fuel to get off the moon as you would earth? Or even half the amount?

Look at the size of the space shuttles fuels tanks.

I don't see any fuel tanks on this egg box.




posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: ProfessorPatternfish
They are covered by the nonaerodynamic sheathing that you are bitching about.
SGIP already posted a photo with one tank exposed: Post



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 09:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: ProfessorPatternfish
Where are the fuel tanks?

I assume one would need almost as much fuel to get off the moon as you would earth? Or even half the amount?


So you claim the gravity on the moon is the same as on earth....


I don't see any fuel tanks on this egg box.


Well, if you do not even bother looking for them how do you expect to see them!



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Chadwickus
Would you live in this house?

Look at that rickety foil wrap, there's no way the roof can stay up!

Good example. You can't really tell what's under the wrapping by looking at the wrapping, so the fact the OP thinks the covering foil looks flimsy is a ridiculous reason for drawing conclusions about the internal structure.

Now if the OP had done any real research he could find some sound engineering reasons for claiming the Apollo spacecraft were a bit on the flimsy side...they were compared to say Russian spacecraft which could operate at sea level pressure, over 14psi. Apollo operated at a little more than a third of that pressure, maybe 5 psi, and as a result the spacecraft could be made more lightweight and yes more flimsy than the Russian designs.

But it wasn't so flimsy that it didn't work, it was engineered to get the job done which it did, and while the Russians had sturdier spacecraft they never managed to land a man on the moon, though I think that had more to do with their booster rocket design problems. Synching 30 rocket engines was apparently a lot harder than 5, or something like that.



posted on Apr, 5 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   
I dunno. My Dad me got into his 79 Pinto to go see The Empire Strikes Back.
And I was a kid that read the newspaper at recess rather than pretending I WAS in the Empire Strikes Back.

So I knew what was going on with the Pinto.

And as far as I knew, NASA, aside from the Apollo 13 mess didn't have any problems with it.
And if memory serves, it wasn't even the LM that had the problem.

So probably yes.
edit on 5-4-2016 by Spader because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
20
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join