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.
This is the better solution. And assembling things in orbit is incredibly hard. The fact that you think it isn't just goes to show you truely have no concept or grasp on the difficulties of manned space flight.
My point was that in the hundreds of capsule based missions how many have burned up on reentry? The Shuttle has had fewer missions and has had one accident upon reentry. The capsules therefore have a higher success rating as far as reentry goes.
Have you seen the inside of the Shuttle?
Originally posted by jra
Wow you really really need to learn more about the LM. After each EVA, the astronauts would return to the LM and take off there suits. They would eat and sleep in the LM without there helmets on.
Originally posted by pepsi78
And as for capsules beeing safe there have been a dedly incident with out even taking off, just because they entered it they burned in it till they died, right before the moon mission.
Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
The Shuttle [...] has had one accident upon reentry. The capsules therefore have a higher success rating as far as reentry goes.
Originally posted by SteveR
Originally posted by jra
Wow you really really need to learn more about the LM. After each EVA, the astronauts would return to the LM and take off there suits. They would eat and sleep in the LM without there helmets on.
They ate and slept on the moon?
Originally posted by Apass
No, they didn't. It's far more risky to make 3 moon landings in one mission than just to remain on the moon's surface.
And they would have need large amounts of fuel to take off and then land again the next day, for 3 day in a row.
Originally posted by pepsi78
Not that hard, space stations, like the international space station , like mir have all been asebled in orbit.
Yes of course I did , and I can tell you it has more space than a capsule would ever have. It has a cargo bay, people can stay in the shuttle with out any helmets even if the bay dors open and with out any space suits on them.
Open the dor to the capsule and show me how can you stay with out any protection in it.
if nasa does not have money maybe they should do something united with other countrys, with the russians, with the international space agency, ways can be found, if it's a problem regarding the budget then why not unite with others, just like the international space station, when people unite the results are biger,
that is if nasa does not act like a red neck.
And that is based on what , on the apollo capsule, I see, so how about if the astronauts want to go to another location? let's say they want to go to the other side of the moon, they just walk huh
That's just the capsule based sistem, it's not worth it.
Originally posted by pepsi78
And that is based on what , on the apollo capsule, I see, so how about if the astronauts want to go to another location? let's say they want to go to the other side of the moon, they just walk huh
you are geting it right, with no cargo bay and with out any consistant fuel tank to store fuel I would say the same, it's just the limitations of the design
That's just the capsule based sistem, it's not worth it.
The cargo bay, oddly enough, is for cargo... So how does that help the crew with thier needs for space?
The Apollos couldn't land on the other side of the Moon due to communications and safety issues.
The landing sites of Apollo were scouted out months in advance to make sure that they would be safe for a landing.
The far side of the Moon was less observed at the time, making it less safe to land on.
In modern times, the lander portion of the CEV should be able to land on the Moon. Hopefully they'll set up relays though, so as to avoid communications issues.
Maybe in the universe you live in, but here in the real world it's actually quite a great design.
Actually we're talking about the Lunar Module, not the Apollo capsule. They are seperate things. And the astronauts don't decide where to go. As it has already been said. The missions are planned far in advance. The astronauts can't just go land where ever. They got to follow the mission plan.
How would a cargo bay help the LM or the Apollo CSM? It didn't need one. You do know that the Shuttle pretty much runs out of fuel by the time it gets into orbit don't you?
It just has thrusters to manuver once in space. It too, like everything in the world, has design limitations.
What's a consistant fuel tank anyway?
Originally posted by pepsi78
it's funny that you ask, it's for eqiptment, hmmm let's see what nasa could take along.
Yes they can
but hey you need a cargo bay for that, of course a big antena would not fit in a capsule based sistem.
What do you mean by that, can you elaborate more please?
Telemetry can be obdained also from the moon orbit by scaning the lunar surface, but with no fuel , because of the little fuel suply tank that is ineficent, due to the design of the ship, if you can call it a ship at all.
yep faliure to acive goals, due to implementation of the 60's tecnology.
1 Unable to land to a site and then take of to another.
2 Unable to cary extra equiptment such as big radio antenas for relay transmison.
1 this can be acived by huge radio antenas which are very big in size, for 30 kilometers range , note just 30 kilometers range you would need a 60 feet telescopic antena, I would like to see them cary that with what they intend to go on the moon with.
2 Another way would be thru satelite comuniactionm with geo stational satelites , with no satelites in orbit of the moon to relay the signal, satelite comunication with the other part of the moon is imposible with what nasa is going on the moon.
The only way to pull this off, is for nasa to cary the satelite to the moon for a relay, the way the shuttle does it when it takes in space satelites, this would reqire for a larger cargo bay or for nasa to take with them telescopic antenas to set up relay stations.
Not being able to pull a mission to the other part of the moon is unaceptable, the dark part of the moon must be explored, it's simply unacetable.
Where are you getting your information?
Does your teacher still grade you on your handwriting?
So far all you've done is ignore what proves that you know zilch of what you argue, and ramble nonsensical jibberish that in itself proves that you dont know zilch of what you argue. Are you intentionally encouraging others to waste keystrokes trying to show you how wrong you are. That's the only unoffensive conclusion I can come to... that this is a charade.
Originally posted by pepsi78
with no cargo bays , and no biger fuel tanks this mission is going to be a failure, this mission will just repeat what apolo has done.
Do you need fuel to get to the Moon? No. You coast there, preferably via a Hohmann transfer orbit
What are you refering to, a stationary orbit?
. Also, for like the eightyth time, cargo is going to be sent up in the CaLV.
Originally posted by pepsi78
Orbit? what are you talking about? nasa has never made a complete orbit of the moon with people on board, due to transmision limitations, the moon would block the transmision, there are no ways to relay the signal.
Do you got specifications on that? like details, width, and height.
The Ares V can lift more than 286,000 pounds to low Earth orbit and stands approximately 360 feet tall. This versatile system will be used to carry cargo and the components into orbit needed to go to the moon and later to Mars.
Also, judging by your comments that it's not a junk yard out there and that it's valuable equipment, you obviously have no idea just how much junk is truely in orbit.