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.
Originally posted by Exuberant1
There are clearly large amounts of objects/debris visible in Majorion's video - but not in any of the pictures that are filming in the human visual range.
This disparity perplexes me. Given the size of the 'debris', one would assume that it should be quite prominent in the regular photographs - but it is not. Only the shuttle ir/uv camera films the debris to the extent that it is shown in Majorion's video.
How would you account for this RFBurns? Critters maybe?
Originally posted by JimOberg
Your misleading assumptions are based on closing your mind and eyes to some everyday realities of the photographic imaging art and science, in my interpretation.
science.ksc.nasa.gov...
"On Friday, Feb 3, 1995 at 6:30 a.m. CST, STS-63 MCC Status Report # 1 reports that flight controllers were troubleshooting a problem with AFT RCS thruster R1U which has a slow leak of 2-3lbs/hr"
"On Friday, Feb 3, 1995 at 1:15 p.m. CST, STS-63 MCC Status Report # 2 states: The leaking RCS thruster is losing between 1-2 pounds of propellant every hour, a manageable loss according to mission managers."
"On Sunday, Feb 5, 1995 at 7:30 a.m. CST, the Mission Update status briefing reported that the problem with forward RCS thruster F1F is now resolved. Previously it was leaking at the rate of 3-5lbs per hour...
...This same procedure was repeated on the leaking AFT R1U thruster to no avail."
Originally posted by Exuberant1
NASA dcided the risk was minimal, and pressed ahead without informing or obtaing the fully-informed consent of the Cosmonauts and Russian Space program - who were both 'left out of the loop'.
All talk of the fuel-leak was omitted, it was left out of the dialogue between the astronauts and the ground, as is evident from the video. At the very least, the extent of the leak was not conveyed to the Russians living on Mir...
If it were not for the logs released after the mission (and the testimony/reports by our astronauts) - no one apart from NASA would have been aware of the full extent of the leak.
Nonsense:
history.nasa.gov...
The Russians didn’t want Discovery to come within 1,000 feet of Mir. But NASA flight controllers and the Discovery crew "worked the problem," at times rolling the Orbiter to warm the thrusters in the Sun. As Reeves tells the story, the Russian engineers were "very sharp and astute … and asked all the right questions." They changed the minimum separation to 400 feet, still not close enough for meaningful data.
Originally posted by Exuberant1
...Footage, which I posit is evidence of negligence on the part of NASA, who valued a payload and a political objective ahead of the lives of men and women(?) on board those two spacecraft and who neglected to provide the Russians with accurate data about the fuel leak that Discovery was experiencing.
Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by RFBurns
Greetings RFBurns & Majorion,
I have been trying to locate a video of this incident filmed with one of the Camera's on-board Mir - to no avail.
Interestingly, I have been able to locate several photos that were taken during the 'rendezvous' period, and have been unable to discern any of amount of debris or particulate in the vicinity - although there may be some, it is certainly minimal and difficult to detect.
There are clearly large amounts of objects/debris visible in Majorion's video - but not in any of the pictures that are filming in the human visual range.
This disparity perplexes me. Given the size of the 'debris', one would assume that it should be quite prominent in the regular photographs - but it is not. Only the shuttle ir/uv camera films the debris to the extent that it is shown in Majorion's video.
How would you account for this RFBurns? Critters maybe?
*here is a link to some of the photos that I mention:
spaceflight.nasa.gov...
Originally posted by RFBurns
Curious.
Originally posted by JimOberg
Indeed, it is curious how you argue your case by conjuring up false 'requirements' for some consequence, and then you debunk these irrelevant 'requirements', concluding you have disproven the consequent.
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by RFBurns
Curious.
Indeed, it is curious how you argue your case by conjuring up false 'requirements' for some consequence, and then you debunk these irrelevant 'requirements', concluding you have disproven the consequent.
There's actually a time-honored name for this logical fallacy, in all standard books of 'argumentation and debate'. It is a common practice, often based on honest but wooly thinking, sometimes based on deliberate desire to force one's views by any means.
But it doesn't hold water OR ice, on Earth or in space.
Originally posted by RFBurns
Hmm....well dont know what to say...cept the example given is testable and verifiable. How about we do a little history lesson.
Apollo 13..when that O2 tank blew its top and tore half of the side out from the command module.
Originally posted by RFBurns
Airbrushed...perhaps?
Dang...Nasty Anomaly Scene Airbrush dudes....they did it again!!!
Originally posted by Exuberant1
"Russian engineers were "very sharp and astute � and asked all the right questions." They changed the minimum separation to 400 feet, still not close enough for meaningful data."
Now, please post the data that was given to the Russians about the leak, at the time of the practice rendezvous....
Oh wait; according to your own link, no "meaningful" data was exchanged at that time and only NASA knew the full extent of the leak ;-)
Thanks phage!
[edit on 17-3-2009 by Exuberant1]
history.nasa.gov...
But, the rendezvous with the Russian space station became STS-63’s primary mission and on the success of this rendezvous hinged the future of the Shuttle-Mir Program. Although the orbital physics of rendezvous were well understood, many techniques were undemonstrated and the stakes were high. Discovery had a mass of 87 tons; Mir weighed 103 tons; and each measured more than 100 feet long. Even a small human error or mechanical glitch could be magnified by the mass and momentum of the spacecraft, jeopardizing the nine lives aboard Discovery and Mir as well as the future of human spaceflight.
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by RFBurns
Hmm....well dont know what to say...cept the example given is testable and verifiable. How about we do a little history lesson.
Apollo 13..when that O2 tank blew its top and tore half of the side out from the command module.
Uh, check your memory....
Originally posted by RFBurns
Originally posted by JimOberg
Originally posted by RFBurns
Hmm....well dont know what to say...cept the example given is testable and verifiable. How about we do a little history lesson.
Apollo 13..when that O2 tank blew its top and tore half of the side out from the command module.
Uh, check your memory....
What is there to check Jim? Do you deny now that the command module was leaking oxygen? .....
Man..you sure do nit pick dont you. Trademark of desperation to the core.
Originally posted by RFBurns
reply to post by Phage
You know the major problem with that Phage..is that NASA tries to make the task of docking with something up in space as if it was a totaly new thing for them.
Did NASA forget that they had practiced this type of manuver dozens of times prior to Apollo and during Apollo?
Does NASA want the people to believe that just because Discovery was docking with a Russian space station, that the well practiced procedure was something completely new that they needed to collect data????
PFFT!!!! What a load a bean gas!!!
Originally posted by JimOberg
I deny that the Command Module was leaking oxygen.
I gave you a chance to back off your arrogant proclamatory style.