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.

 

Young Aussie genius whipping NASA in Moon Hoax Debate!

page: 537
377
<< 534  535  536    538  539  540 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by MacTheKnife

When Iran, Korea (I assume you mean the DPRK) and Zimbabwe have shown any capability or interest in planetary defense we can discuss that (in another thread). In this thread that topic is irrelevant.



Exactly, stay on topic.

Where at the photo and video evidence that the astronauts were cold in Apollo 13?
Where is the condensation of their breath? The shivering? Pallid looks? Proof that they were almost freezing?
Though I wonder why they just didnt freeze? What kept them from freezing actually?

Also, when the "explosion" occured, did the Astronauts feel or hear that it happened? If they didnt, why not?


Due to debris from the explosion, the navigation system was unreliable.

Where is this debris in the photos or videos?



They did not even have power to gimbal the engine so we could begin an immediate return to Earth.


Ok, so...


To return the crew to Earth as quickly and safely as possible, only a single pass around the Moon was made, in what is called a free return trajectory, which uses the Moon's gravity to "slingshot" the spacecraft back to Earth. To enter this trajectory, a significant course correction was required. This would normally have been a simple procedure, using the SM propulsion engine, but the flight controllers did not know exactly how much damage the service module had taken and did not want to risk firing the main engine.


I thought they had no power for the engine anyway?


Because of the severe electrical power limitations following the explosion, no live TV broadcasts were made from the craft for the remainder of the mission; network commentators used models and animated footage to illustrate their coverage.


They did have film and photos, which, as I stated before, was severely lacking.

The other question that I have is, how where they able to keep talking to each other if the power was cut?
How did the antenna work? And how come it didnt get damaged during the explosion?


Three fuel cells, two oxygen tanks, and two hydrogen tanks are located in Sector 4. The damaged area is located above the S-band high gain antenna.








space.about.com...
www.aerospaceguide.net...




posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Originally posted by DJW001 reply to post by FoosM

Thats why they took photos of the Moon and other nonsense, right?

Yes, because taking photos of the Moon was part of the mission, remember? Even in crisis mode, they attempted to complete as much of the mission as possible.



Contrast this for effect:



If you were pretty sure you were going to die a horrible death and no-one would ever be able to recover your body or your camera, would you take pictures...


Why don't you use the whole quote?


If you were pretty sure you were going to die a horrible death and no-one would ever be able to recover your body or your camera, would you take pictures of yourself and your crew-mates? As usual, your argument is based on the fallacy that if someone behaves other than the way you would in a given situation, the situation must not have happened.


Please explain why you needed to censor my post.


Why should I answer this question, when you failed to address mine? I spoke about floating objects in space. multiple ships, lack of condensation on astronaut's breath. You come back floating objects with interior shots that can be easily done in LEO or done in similar manner as they did the Apollo 13 the movie? I mean what is this silly distraction all about?


Pay attention FoosM. I answered your inane question about condensation on the windows. If you cannot figure out that the photos of the SM were taken after it was jettisoned, you're even thicker than you appear. As for the astronaut's breath, would you see noticeable vapor condensation at 5 psi?

Now, are you claiming that these interior scenes were shot in low Earth orbit?
edit on 10-8-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-8-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-8-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Also, when the "explosion" occured, did the Astronauts feel or hear that it happened? If they didnt, why not?



55:56:10 - Haise: "Okay. Right now, Houston, the voltage is --
is looking good. And we had a pretty large bang associated
with the caution and warning there. And as I recall, main B
was the one that had an amp spike on it once before.


nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Good thing you put the word "explosion" in quotes. If you read the transcription of the voice and telemetry, it is clear that what happened was a rupture that led to loss of pressure, not an "explosion." I know, now you're going to cite all the secondary sources that use the word "explosion." I don't know what you would expect to see in terms of debris. Perhaps you could do a mathematical model and predict how many fragments of various sizes you would expect to see, then calculate where they would be in relation to the ship after it had been traveling all the way to the Moon and back.


I thought they had no power for the engine anyway?


They didn't know whether they had any oxidizer left or not. The sensors were blown, remember?


They did have film and photos, which, as I stated before, was severely lacking.


Why do you simply ignore perfectly good explanations?


The other question that I have is, how where they able to keep talking to each other if the power was cut?
How did the antenna work? And how come it didnt get damaged during the explosion?


The power was cut, but they still had at least one power cell online. Telemetry would be the communications priority, and voice. The antenna was a fancy piece of metal pointing in the direction of Earth; so long as the wire between the transmitter and the antenna wasn't cut, it would work.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001

As for the astronaut's breath, would you see noticeable vapor condensation at 5 psi?


How did they maintain the 5psi if their oxygen tanks ruptured and their power was cut?
What kept that pressure up?



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001

The power was cut, but they still had at least one power cell online. Telemetry would be the communications priority, and voice. The antenna was a fancy piece of metal pointing in the direction of Earth; so long as the wire between the transmitter and the antenna wasn't cut, it would work.


Source?

So your saying as long as that fuel cell was online telemetry and voice was possible.
So you would have to agree that if there was no fuel cell telemetry, voice, etc would stop as well.

So...


The command module was not powered down until approximately 2 hours after the explosion. During those hours, the command module was running on its re-entry batteries and one barely functioning fuel cell. When oxygen tank number one finished its slow leak into space, the last surviving fuel cell was shut down and the crew powered down the command module to save the remaining battery power for later entering Earth’s atmosphere.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



So your saying as long as that fuel cell was online telemetry and voice was possible.
So you would have to agree that if there was no fuel cell telemetry, voice, etc would stop as well.


Why do you keep asking pointless questions when you obviously have the answers sitting in front of you? When their last fuel cell went out, they switched to batteries and eventually moved into the LM. What's your point? If you have one, please make it. Oh, still not up to answering any of mine, I see.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by DJW001

The power was cut, but they still had at least one power cell online. Telemetry would be the communications priority, and voice. The antenna was a fancy piece of metal pointing in the direction of Earth; so long as the wire between the transmitter and the antenna wasn't cut, it would work.


Source?

So your saying as long as that fuel cell was online telemetry and voice was possible.
So you would have to agree that if there was no fuel cell telemetry, voice, etc would stop as well.

So...


The command module was not powered down until approximately 2 hours after the explosion. During those hours, the command module was running on its re-entry batteries and one barely functioning fuel cell. When oxygen tank number one finished its slow leak into space, the last surviving fuel cell was shut down and the crew powered down the command module to save the remaining battery power for later entering Earth’s atmosphere.


At which time the S-band link that the LM had was used. How do imagine voice and data and video from the Moon got to the Earth ? See Section VI of the following ...

klabs.org...



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
Exactly, stay on topic.
Where at the photo and video evidence that the astronauts were cold in Apollo 13?
Where is the condensation of their breath? The shivering? Pallid looks? Proof that they were almost freezing?
Though I wonder why they just didnt freeze? What kept them from freezing actually?
They didn't freeze because it never got below freezing even in the shut down CSM. Recall the LM was still operating* and people produce heat and the vehicle will get some heating from the Sun (hence the "BBQ roll"). It's not like it got cold immedately after the incident. They were flying, in effect, in a Thermos bottle. EDIT : Didn't nataylor cover all this in a prior post ? I think he did.

*again from your prior link ...

Later, they powered down all of the systems in the LM except those required for life support, communications, and environmental control.

space.about.com...

As for video on any of the above ... can't say I've bothered to look.


Originally posted by FoosM
Also, when the "explosion" occured, did the Astronauts feel or hear that it happened? If they didnt, why not?
You're kidding ... right ? There are all sorts of accounts of the crew hearing a loud bang and thinking it was Haize playing a joke. From your own link ...

This Is No Joke
Immediately after attempting to follow Houston Flight Control’s last order to stir the cryo tanks, Astronaut Jack Swigert heard a loud bang and felt a shudder throughout the ship. Command module pilot, Fred Haize, who was still down in Aquarius after the television broadcast, and mission commander, Jim Lovell, who was in between, gathering cables up, both heard the sound, but at first thought it was a standard joke previously played by Fred Haize. It was no joke.
Seeing the expression on Jack Swigert’s face, Jim Lovell knew immediately that there was a real problem and hurried into the CSM to join his Lunar module pilot. Things did not look good. Alarms were going off as voltage levels of the main power supplies were dropping rapidly. If power was completely lost, the ship had a battery backup, which would last for about ten hours. Apollo 13, unfortunately, was 87 hours from home.



Originally posted by FoosM

Due to debris from the explosion, the navigation system was unreliable.

Where is this debris in the photos or videos?
The debris field might not be visible in the photos or videos (due to lighting) or might not have been there at the time those were taken. There were times when star sighting was possible, and accomplished, after the "explosion". See Section E (pg 21) of ...
klabs.org...
Note that while debris may have at times prevented a reliable star fix, that doesn't mean they were flying through something like a snowstorm.


Originally posted by FoosM

They did not even have power to gimbal the engine so we could begin an immediate return to Earth.

Ok, so...

To return the crew to Earth as quickly and safely as possible, only a single pass around the Moon was made, in what is called a free return trajectory, which uses the Moon's gravity to "slingshot" the spacecraft back to Earth. To enter this trajectory, a significant course correction was required. This would normally have been a simple procedure, using the SM propulsion engine, but the flight controllers did not know exactly how much damage the service module had taken and did not want to risk firing the main engine.

I thought they had no power for the engine anyway?
I'm not sure what your objection is.


Originally posted by FoosM
The other question that I have is, how where they able to keep talking to each other if the power was cut?
How did the antenna work? And how come it didnt get damaged during the explosion?

Three fuel cells, two oxygen tanks, and two hydrogen tanks are located in Sector 4. The damaged area is located above the S-band high gain antenna.

So the antenna didn't get damaged. Was there some reason it had to have been damaged ? As far as comms went after the CSM was powered down, I answered that in my prior post.
edit on 10/8/11 by MacTheKnife because: (no reason given)

edit on 10/8/11 by MacTheKnife because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
How did they maintain the 5psi if their oxygen tanks ruptured and their power was cut?
What kept that pressure up?

Why should the cabin pressure have dropped ? It's not like the CM cabin was ruptured. Just the supply tanks to it. At this point I feel the need to reiterate my prior point re: how some people don't understand things like valves.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM


You silly goose.
Define what you mean by "real".
It speaks for itself, I think. Once again, FoosM reflexively responds a question with another question about some insignificant technical nuance, while carefully avoiding making any definitive statement. Except in this case, the technical nuance is reality itself.



posted on Aug, 10 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



Also, when the "explosion" occured, did the Astronauts feel or hear that it happened? If they didnt, why not?



55:56:10 - Haise: "Okay. Right now, Houston, the voltage is --
is looking good. And we had a pretty large bang associated
with the caution and warning there. And as I recall, main B
was the one that had an amp spike on it once before.


nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Good thing you put the word "explosion" in quotes. If you read the transcription of the voice and telemetry, it is clear that what happened was a rupture that led to loss of pressure, not an "explosion." I know, now you're going to cite all the secondary sources that use the word "explosion." .


So now what you are saying is that a rupture causing a loud bang, destroying components near it is not an explosion? Something with the word explosion? Does the word put a wrench into the official story regarding Apollo 13?



"...The Apollo 13 malfunction was caused by an explosion and rupture of oxygen tank no. 2 in the service module. The explosion ruptured a line or damaged a valve in the no. 1 oxygen tank, causing it to lose oxygen rapidly. The service module bay no.4 cover was blown off. All oxygen stores were lost within about 3 hours, along with loss of water, electrical power, and use of the propulsion system.


Wait... lets fix that:


"...The Apollo 13 malfunction was caused by [a bang] and rupture of oxygen tank no. 2 in the service module. The [bang] ruptured a line or damaged a valve in the no. 1 oxygen tank, causing it to lose oxygen rapidly. The service module bay no.4 cover was blown off. All oxygen stores were lost within about 3 hours, along with loss of water, electrical power, and use of the propulsion system.


Does that work better for you? A bang blew off the cover of the module bay?

Lets continue with the text fixed:


56 hours into the mission, at about 03:06 UT on 14 April 1970 (10:06 PM, April 13 EST), the power fans were turned on within the tank. The exposed fan wires shorted and the teflon insulation caught fire. This fire spread along the wires to the electrical conduit in the side of the tank, which weakened and ruptured under the nominal 1000 psi pressure within the tank, causing the no. 2 oxygen tank to [bang]. This damaged the no. 1 tank and parts of the interior of the service module and blew off the bay no. 4 cover. ..."


Now wait a minute.
Did they just say a fire caused the [bang]?

Fire.

Then an oxygen tank exploded... err sorry *banged*

So fire and pressured oxygen....



Lets take a look at some ruptures and loud bangs relating to oxygen tanks.

Remember, most of these are very small tanks under less pressure in relation to Apollo 13:


what happen if you cut the valve of your scuba tank....but this test's are made with 300bar tanks!!

or












apollo13page.tripod.com...



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM
Lets take a look at some ruptures and loud bangs relating to oxygen tanks.

Remember, most of these are very small tanks under less pressure in relation to Apollo 13:
what happen if you cut the valve of your scuba tank....but this test's are made with 300bar tanks!!


300 bars (4,351 psi) is more than 4 times the nominal pressure in the service module oxygen tanks, and more than double the burst pressure.

From the Apollo 13 Review Board Report:




posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by 000063

Originally posted by FoosM


You silly goose.
Define what you mean by "real".
It speaks for itself, I think.


Well then you have doubt, and therefore it would be normal for you would ask for clarification.
But I guess you are used to accepting information as its presented without any critical analysis.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by MacTheKnife

Originally posted by FoosM
How did they maintain the 5psi if their oxygen tanks ruptured and their power was cut?
What kept that pressure up?

Why should the cabin pressure have dropped ? It's not like the CM cabin was ruptured. Just the supply tanks to it. At this point I feel the need to reiterate my prior point re: how some people don't understand things like valves.


Wasnt oxygen cycled ?



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 



Wasnt oxygen cycled ?


Was the oxygen tank that blew out for life support or oxidizer?
(You're not the only one who can answer a question with a question.)
Oh, and are you claiming that the microgravity scenes were shot in LEO?

edit on 11-8-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
Was the oxygen tank that blew out for life support or oxidizer?
The oxygen tanks supplied the fuel cells and environmental systems. They were not used as part of the propulsion system.

Of course, there was an independent supply of oxygen available in the LM, which is what they used after oxygen tank 1 was depleted in the SM.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by FoosM
 



Wasnt oxygen cycled ?


Was the oxygen tank that blew out for life support or oxidizer?
(You're not the only one who can answer a question with a question.)
Oh, and are you claiming that the microgravity scenes were shot in LEO?

edit on 11-8-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)


I asked a legitimate question to know if I misunderstood what the oxygen was used for and how cabin pressure worked.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by FoosM

Originally posted by MacTheKnife

Originally posted by FoosM
How did they maintain the 5psi if their oxygen tanks ruptured and their power was cut?
What kept that pressure up?

Why should the cabin pressure have dropped ? It's not like the CM cabin was ruptured. Just the supply tanks to it. At this point I feel the need to reiterate my prior point re: how some people don't understand things like valves.

Wasnt oxygen cycled ?

I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this so let me try to cut directly to the end. The CM re-enters the Earth's atmosphere unattached to the SM. That means every connection; electrical, plumbing, whatever between the two needs to be disconnected near the end of the mission. That in turn means the CM must have the ability to seal all those no-longer-connected connections off so what's inside the CM doesn't vent to space. So any breakage internal to the SM can be sealed off by those valves in the CM. The only way the CM will lose pressure is if there's some puncture through the hull of the CM, in this case potentially through the heat shield. That didn't happen.

So if you're in the HB'er camp, the avenue to follow (stemming from this particular line of inquiry) is to examine all the CM drawings in the [forlorn] hope of finding that the above capability does not exist. Where there no such shut off capability then you'd have something suspicious to bring to the table. I think you'll end up disappointed in such a quest but that would be your due diligence.



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 10:55 AM
link   
May I also add that I don't see how Apollo 13 makes any sense in the HB'er view of the world. Obviously from that viewpoint, A13 wasn't nearly at the Moon when something bad happened. I'm not even sure if HB "theory" has any sort of accident happening in real life ... or whether it's all some act. In this case why would some NASA trickster write such a script ? It doesn't make sense. They'd be running the risk of the public going "OMG why are we risking the poor astronauts lives given we've already beaten the Ruskies to the Moon?". More importantly such an incident invites a lot of congressional attention and a potential investigation. Given the inability of anyone in DC to keep a secret, I have to think that a "good" hoax theory has most legislators being kept in the dark. So these people might just be diligent about getting to the bottom of things, even if only to curry favor from the public. There's a good chance that independant investigators (also not in on it) will be called in to scrutinize all the Apollo hardware and procedures and plans and ... It all seems like a very big risk of disclosure or discovery to take if you're running a scam. So why write such a script ? If it's all faked why not script Apollo 13 be a success and avoid all the unwanted attention ?
edit on 11/8/11 by MacTheKnife because: spellin



posted on Aug, 11 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

The LM 'lifeboat' procedure had actually been created during a training simulation in the simulator not long before the flight of Apollo 13.




Man, they were sure lucky to simulate and practice this particular procedure right before Apollo 13 needed it.

Coincidence or Providence?

Was that mentioned in the movie?




A Year Earlier, in the run-up to the Apollo 10 mission, the flight controllers and astronauts had been thrown a curveball during a simulation. "The simulation guys failed those fuel cells at almost the same spot," as when Apollo 13's oxygen tank exploded in real life, remembers James ("Jim") Hannigan, the lunar module branch chief, "It was uncanny." Legler had been present for the Apollo 10 simulation when the lunar module was suddenly in demand as a lifeboat. While some lifeboat procedures had already been worked out for earlier missions, none addressed having to use the lunar module as a lifeboat with a damaged command module attached. Although Legler called in reinforcements from among the other lunar module flight controllers, they were unable to get the spacecraft powered up in time, and the Apollo 10 simulation had finished with a dead crew.




That realistic situation would be impossible in Hollywoods version of Apollo!

But anyway, so they had this back prior to Apollo 10?!
Kind of kills the drama of the story here.


"Many people had discussed the use of the LM as lifeboat, but we found out in this sim," that exactly how to do it couldn't be worked out in real time, Legler says. At the time, the simulation was rejected as unrealistic, and it was soon forgotten by most. NASA "didn't consider that an authentic failure case," because it involved the simultaneous failure of so many systems, explains Hannigan.


I can see NASA now plugging their ears and walking away yelling

"La La La La...I am not listening to you Jeffrey, failure is not an option... this didn't happen!"


But the simulation nagged at the lunar module controllers. They had been caught unprepared and a crew had died, albeit only virtually. "You lose a crew, even in a simulation, and it's doom," says Hannigan. He tasked his deputy, Donald Puddy, to form a team to come up with a set of lifeboat procedures that would work, even with a crippled command module in the mix.


NASA: "OMG.... maybe we need to fake this program after all. LOL. Better call RAND and initiate 'Plan 9'"

Hey... this got me to thinking, what if Apollo 13 failure was due to somebody on the inside whistle-blowing. They simply initiated the wrong simulation of purpose. Except they underestimated how fast NASA could spin the incident in their favor. But I think it was actually planned:



Liebergot's wingmen that day were Dick Brown, a power-systems specialist, and George Bliss and Larry Sheaks, both life support specialists. As the pressure rapidly rose in oxygen tank two and then abruptly fell within seconds, their eyes were fixed on the other cryogenic tank readouts, and they all missed the signs that tank two had just exploded.


See, how could these people miss this? This was their job. LOL.








spectrum.ieee.org...



new topics

top topics



 
377
<< 534  535  536    538  539  540 >>

log in

join