Author Topic: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch  (Read 12588 times)

Offline Obviousman

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 398
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #480 on: January 08, 2019, 10:38:29 PM »
Hehe. Reminds me of the old joke: Engineers were concerned that there were four different standards for the same item. They got together in a meeting with all the stakeholders in order to resolve the issue. They finished up the meeting.... now there were five standards.

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3032
    • Clavius
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #481 on: March 30, 2019, 10:19:47 PM »
Since Jr Knowing claims he didn't stealth-flounce, I'm bumping this thread to remind him that he has questions to answer now that he's returned.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3032
    • Clavius
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #482 on: March 31, 2019, 06:23:36 PM »
Jr Knowing :--

You abandoned this thread some time ago without reconciling the claims you made in it with the facts brought forward by others, often from your own sources.  You disputed the explanation of your departure that opined you were unable to respond.  Instead, you have told us you were merely busy elsewhere and were detained from shouldering your end of this debate.  If your story is true, then we have no reason to believe you have lost interest in this topic.  Those of us who put considerable time and effort into correcting your misconceptions would consider it to have been less a waste of our time if you would pick this topic up where you left off.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3032
    • Clavius
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #483 on: April 02, 2019, 09:05:40 AM »
Jr Knowing :--

Since you posted in the other section of the forum regarding the Apollo 11 documentary, may we presume that you noticed that the ascent footage of the Saturn V clearly showed the flow separation boundary at the CM-SM joint?  And that the flow didn't reattach to the fuselage until nearly the SM-SLA joint?  Will we finally get an admission from you that the RCS jets on the SM were quite well protected inside the separation boundary and therefore needed no special fairings?

Any love at all for this former topic, which you claimed you didn't abandon in frustration?
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline jr Knowing

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #484 on: April 02, 2019, 12:14:25 PM »
Hi Jay,

Actually it is not quite the way I saw it when I watched the movie. I thought the flow separation occurs part way down the Service Module and the RCS are right at the top of the module. I would think there would be a lot of turbulence right where the RCS's are located. Here is the Apollo 11 trailer, check around the 55 second mark. As you can see the air flow bows out part way down the silver SM section.



Also, btw check out the 1 minute mark of the trailer. It shows the LM being transported from production to mating. It is almost unrecognizable versus the LM we see in space. The legs are different, the undercarriage and sides are different, the ladder is wrapped differently and there are no plume deflectors. And yes there is some minimal documentation, mainly third party and after the fact, that suggests the LM got a complete makeover on the launch pad. Maybe so, but it does seem unusual to make all these literally last minute changes and add all this additional weight. I thought they were offering $50000 bonuses to the manufacturers to eliminate one pound of weight and here they go tacking on a bunch a weight post production.   


Offline bknight

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 2746
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #485 on: April 02, 2019, 12:35:38 PM »
Hi Jay,

Actually it is not quite the way I saw it when I watched the movie. I thought the flow separation occurs part way down the Service Module and the RCS are right at the top of the module. I would think there would be a lot of turbulence right where the RCS's are located. Here is the Apollo 11 trailer, check around the 55 second mark. As you can see the air flow bows out part way down the silver SM section.

<snip>   

No the separation begins where the CSM is attached to the SM, your eyesight fails in your interpretation.

ETA  IIRC this separation occurs at each change in geometry of the vehicle.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2019, 12:45:43 PM by bknight »
Truth needs no defense.  Nobody can take those footsteps I made on the surface of the moon away from me.
Eugene Cernan

Offline Zakalwe

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1326
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #486 on: April 02, 2019, 12:55:34 PM »
I thought
I would think

but it does seem unusual
I thought

See where you troubles lie? You are thinking and imagining about things that you have zero experience in and little knowledge of. This stuff is not common-sense or intuitive and as long as you continue to think that you can apply common-sense to it you will continue to flounder and trash around.

The legs are different, the undercarriage and sides are different,
I have to ask....you do realise that the legs are folded in to fit into the LM storage area? And that they were extended after the CSM/LM stack performed a successful LOI?
« Last Edit: April 02, 2019, 12:57:35 PM by Zakalwe »
"The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.' " - Isaac Asimov

Offline jr Knowing

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #487 on: April 02, 2019, 01:00:31 PM »
Hi Bknight,

I am looking at it on a 55 inch 4K screen right now.  The separation appears to take place part way down the Service Module. And I have good eyesight.

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3032
    • Clavius
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #488 on: April 02, 2019, 01:01:34 PM »
I thought the flow separation occurs part way down the Service Module...

No.  That is not how flow separation works.  Your observation and interpretation are in error.

Quote
I would think there would be a lot of turbulence right where the RCS's are located.

That is correct, but turbulence is not an issue for projecting structures as it would be for structures that extend into a supersonic slipstream, as was your original concern.  Turbulence imposes several orders of magnitude less drag loading.  You're changing horses trying to find anything that you can claim to be a problem without knowing whether it really would be.

Quote
As you can see the air flow bows out part way down the silver SM section.

No, that's where the visible condensation begins in that particular case.  Where the condensation begins is not necessarily where the flow separation begins.  The flow separation begins where there is a discontinuity in the geometry of the projectile -- namely where the conical CM abruptly transitions to the cylindrical SM.  If the flow manages to follow that, there is no reason for it suddenly to separate partway down the SM at some arbitrary place along the continuous surface.  You are floundering about, cargo-cult fashion, trying to pretend expertise you clearly do not have.   That is not a valid basis from which to question the authenticity of the Apollo project.

Quote
Also, btw check out the 1 minute mark of the trailer. It shows the LM being transported from production to mating. It is almost unrecognizable versus the LM we see in space. The legs are different, the undercarriage and sides are different, the ladder is wrapped differently and there are no plume deflectors.

Asked and answered.  At the time it is depicted in the trailer, it is not finished being built.  You were told this multiple times earlier in the thread.  You have a completely ignorant expectation for construction and integration methods.

Quote
...but it does seem unusual to make all these literally last minute changes and add all this additional weight.

Asked and answered.  You are not an expert on how spacecraft are designed and built.  Therefore your opinion as to what to expect from such a process is utterly useless as a yardstick by which to measure evidence.  Do not simply ask again that we validate your poorly-informed speculation.

This was all previously covered in this thread.  Now that you have returned to the thread and are paying attention to it now, do not waste your critics' time by simply starting it over de novo and attempting to re-litigate all the prior arguments we determined were based on ignorant expectations.  You were given specific questions to address once you returned to this thread.  Here they are, for your convenience.

Insisting it is suspect that the LM looks different between stacking and landing, despite being shown the apparatus and documentation relating to work done on the pad after stacking.

Insisiting it is suspect that the RCS quads on the service module are exposed even after being informed of why they were not at risk of being damaged by airflow during take-off.

Failing to acknowledge the difference between a paper and a memo

Failing, after several times of saying you had it, to provide a 'more detailed' paper that you say proves the RCS system required perfect balance to operate correctly.

Failing to address the clear and evident fact that the memo you used to support your argument that the plume deflectors introduce instability actually says exactly the opposite for all but one very unlikely scenario.

Getting mixed up between LM and CSM RCS systems used on Apollo 13.

I notice that with respect to the first one you have simply doubled down on your ignorant expectations, despite having been thoroughly instructed about how the LM was built.  You complain that you are being subjected to a "hornet's nest" of criticism.  This clearly dishonest behavior on your part may be why you feel that way.  Contrary to your protests, you are not behaving reasonably.  Kindly correct your behavior.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3032
    • Clavius
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #489 on: April 02, 2019, 01:02:28 PM »
And I have good eyesight.

Do you have any formal qualifications in aerodynamics, especially in the transonic and supersonic regimes?  A simple yes or no answer will suffice.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3032
    • Clavius
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #490 on: April 02, 2019, 01:04:25 PM »
I am looking at it on a 55 inch 4K screen right now.

Big deal, I saw it twice in IMAX.  Plus, I am formally, professionally qualified in the sciences that govern what we're all seeing on the screen, and am in a position to interpret authoritatively what is being depicted.  Which of us is more likely to be correct regarding where the flow separation (as opposed to the visible condensation that is occasionally a consequence of flow separation) is occurring?
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline jr Knowing

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 102
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #491 on: April 02, 2019, 01:06:21 PM »
Hi Zakalwe,

I have no idea what your are talking about? Take a look at the legs for instance. On the moon the pads are completely different and legs were wrapped completely different. That’s not my opinion, that is a fact.

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3032
    • Clavius
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #492 on: April 02, 2019, 01:10:46 PM »
That’s not my opinion, that is a fact.

What is your opinion is that these various differences in the appearance of the LM during the various phases of preparing it for flight is somehow suspicious.  Zakalwe is correctly pointing out that your suspicion is based on expectations you hold, which are in turn based on abject ignorance of how spacecraft are actually built.  It's not a problem that you are not well informed about how to build spacecraft, and it is not a problem that you develop poorly-informed expectations.  What's a problem is that you resist tooth-and-nail being educated by people who know these things as a matter of professional training and practice, and prefer instead to cling to your ignorance.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline onebigmonkey

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1327
  • ALSJ Clown
    • Apollo Hoax Debunked
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #493 on: April 02, 2019, 01:18:36 PM »
Hi Jay,

Actually it is not quite the way I saw it when I watched the movie. I thought the flow separation occurs part way down the Service Module and the RCS are right at the top of the module. I would think there would be a lot of turbulence right where the RCS's are located. Here is the Apollo 11 trailer, check around the 55 second mark. As you can see the air flow bows out part way down the silver SM section.



Also, btw check out the 1 minute mark of the trailer. It shows the LM being transported from production to mating. It is almost unrecognizable versus the LM we see in space. The legs are different, the undercarriage and sides are different, the ladder is wrapped differently and there are no plume deflectors. And yes there is some minimal documentation, mainly third party and after the fact, that suggests the LM got a complete makeover on the launch pad. Maybe so, but it does seem unusual to make all these literally last minute changes and add all this additional weight. I thought they were offering $50000 bonuses to the manufacturers to eliminate one pound of weight and here they go tacking on a bunch a weight post production.   

Gee, do you think those extra pieces might just have been accounted for in the sums? Do you really imagine that they weighed the thing without all these 'extras' and then went "oh crap..."?

No-one suggests the LM got a 'complete makeover' on the pad, that is not what was said to you.

Finally, what you see in the clip is an LM being carried along, Where do you see it say that it's being taken to the final mating? Are you absolutely certain that is the Apollo 11 LM?

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3032
    • Clavius
Re: Apollo 11 Lunar Lander Pre-Launch
« Reply #494 on: April 02, 2019, 01:29:23 PM »
Finally, what you see in the clip is an LM being carried along, Where do you see it say that it's being taken to the final mating? Are you absolutely certain that is the Apollo 11 LM?

Indeed, it's just a random shot of a lunar module being hoisted through the VAB low bay.  All the rest is just assumption on Jr Knowing's part -- assuming it's LM-5, that it's on its way to mating, that it's supposed to be completely finished and closed out before any mating occurs.  Zakalwe and many others have tried to bring to his attention just how much he is assuming in all these arguments, but to no avail.  He just barges obliviously ahead.  There is very little hope until such time as he can separate assumption from fact.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams