• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Apollo "hoax" discussion - continuation thread

MRC_Hans said:
One side of the capsule faced the sun, getting heated, the other side faced the 2degK of deep space and was cooled. The resultant temperature is the result of proper distribution of reflective surfaces.

This is not just an Apollo issue, this applies to ALL space-craft. Are you implying that ALL space activities, including communication and weather sattelites are hoaxes?

Hans
Click to expand...

All manned spacecraft seem suspicious to me. The International Space Station is definitely real, but I think it's unmanned.
 
Ok, let's say that the heat insulation was enough for traveling to the moon and back, but what about the reentry into Earth's atmosphere? The claim that a heat shield could protect the astronauts seems dubious to me. The Apollo capsule would have burned up in its entirety! Like a meteorite.
 
Anders Lindman said:
For the astronauts to survive. I found this:

"The entire basic structure is enveloped by thermal insulation and a micrometeorite shield." -- pp. 2: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/LM04_Lunar_Module_ppLV1-17.pdf

Ok, may have been enough, but the document also mentions active thermal control, pp. 7:

"Active thermal control is provided by the ECS."

The capsule is traveling in the vacuum of empty space. How is the extra heat removed? By expelling hot gas/liquid out into space?
Click to expand...

True, astronaut farts kept the capsule cool.
 
tsig said:
True, astronaut farts kept the capsule cool.
Click to expand...

MRC_Hans' answer seems more plausible. :p That one side of the capsule was cool. Radiation of heat out while no radiation absorption since it was the shadow side.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Ok, let's say that the heat insulation was enough for traveling to the moon and back, but what about the reentry into Earth's atmosphere? The claim that a heat shield could protect the astronauts seems dubious to me. The Apollo capsule would have burned up in its entirety! Like a meteorite.
Click to expand...

No. Read up on this stuff if you really wanna know. Right now you are just brandishing your own ignorance.

Hans
 
Passive Thermal Control, christened the BBQ roll.

Google it, education is a wonderful thing. All these "seems to me" comments from you indicate your world view is fairly simplistic and in need of enlightenment.
 
MRC_Hans said:
No. Read up on this stuff if you really wanna know. Right now you are just brandishing your own ignorance.

Hans
Click to expand...

I read that the Apollo capsule had a reentry speed of about 7 km/s. That sounds like a lot. And it had a path with a certain exact angle. Excuse me, that seems implausible. How could the capsule be kept from wobbling while holding a precise attack angle? I don't buy it. No tiny steering rockets would be be able to do much in the immense atmospheric onslaught. And since the capsule traveled at an angle, gravity would have pulled on it sideways. Again, wobble time.
 
Erock said:
Passive Thermal Control, christened the BBQ roll.

Google it, education is a wonderful thing. All these "seems to me" comments from you indicate your world view is fairly simplistic and in need of enlightenment.
Click to expand...

I think Google is slightly off on this point. The maneuver was called a Passive Thermal Roll, which was the mechanism for achieving passive thermal control.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I read that the Apollo capsule had a reentry speed of about 7 km/s. That sounds like a lot. And it had a path with a certain exact angle. Excuse me, that seems implausible. How could the capsule be kept from wobbling while holding a precise attack angle? I don't buy it. No tiny steering rockets would be be able to do much in the immense atmospheric onslaught. And since the capsule traveled at an angle, gravity would have pulled on it sideways. Again, wobble time.
Click to expand...

No rockets needed at all. The CM was an aerodynamic lifting body by design.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Ok, let's say that the heat insulation was enough for traveling to the moon and back, but what about the reentry into Earth's atmosphere? The claim that a heat shield could protect the astronauts seems dubious to me. The Apollo capsule would have burned up in its entirety! Like a meteorite.
Click to expand...

It did burn up in the atomsphere like a meteorite. That's how it was designed.
 
Anders Lindman said:
All manned spacecraft seem suspicious to me. The International Space Station is definitely real, but I think it's unmanned.
Click to expand...

I checked with the space alien controlled Vatican and they assured me that all manned spacecraft are actually manned by Good AIs and/or Evil AIs, therefore one does not have to be terribly concerned about enviromental controls on spacecraft.
 
abaddon said:
Google ablative heat shield.
Click to expand...

"The ablative heat shield functions by lifting the hot shock layer gas away from the heat shield's outer wall (creating a cooler boundary layer)." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ablative_heat_shield#Ablative

So now we have even more nonlinearity in addition to the chaotic plasma: an ablative shield that whips away gas in unpredictable directions.

And I think the claim of the heat shield being enough is fiction. The Space Shuttle reentry probably never happened, and instead it was launched from a Boeing 747 and glided to the landing place, with the audience believing the shuttle had come intact from space, lol.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Without tumbling through the air? I doubt that. Had the concept been tested in practice before it was used?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Your disbelief is both unsurprising and inadequate as a premise for proof.

Go away and read some books, there are goats heading for your bridge,
 
Anders Lindman said:
Without tumbling through the air? I doubt that. Had the concept been tested in practice before it was used?
Click to expand...

Of course not, NASA never practiced anything in order to save money. They simply took their best guess and amazingly it usually worked out. But then again they did have a head start with all the info from the Roswell spacecraft.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom