Author Topic: The Absence of Airlocks  (Read 15575 times)

Offline LunarOrbit

  • Administrator
  • Jupiter
  • *****
  • Posts: 933
    • ApolloHoax.net
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #105 on: September 10, 2019, 12:14:40 AM »
Hi Jay,

Petitt is making a rationalization. He knows the technology doesn't exist now but because he believes or assumes the Apollo missions were real, so he is suggesting it once existed. But he also says it is a painful process to rebuild it. Why? It only took 5 years of development 50 years ago to put a man on the moon. Surely, with all of man's advances since then, it should be easier and a shorter time frame now. Do you not agree?
Go ask Ford to build a brand new 1969 Mustang. They could do it 50 years ago, so why can't they quickly do it again today with all of our advances?

Sent from my SM-G975W using Tapatalk

It suddenly struck me that that tiny pea, pretty and blue, was the Earth.
I put up my thumb and shut one eye, and my thumb blotted out the planet Earth.
I didn't feel like a giant. I felt very, very small.
- Neil Armstrong (1930-2012)

Offline sts60

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 398
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #106 on: September 10, 2019, 12:20:28 AM »
...Believe it or not, us non phd's do know about black-body radiation and the S-B law.

You may be aware of the existence of these topics now that they have been explained to you, but you are entirely ignorant of how heat transfer takes place in reality.  You made that abundantly clear with your whopping mistakes in your claims about the LM on the lunar surface.

And while some of the assumptions they use are different from mine, they have demonstrated it would take longer to reach extreme cold than I thought. Having said that, 2 things. 1)Many things within the cabin did not have to reach extreme temperatures to not function. According to NASA docs, for instances, many of the electronic components needed 30 F to function. (and max temp of only of 120F)

...and you don’t understand the actual conditions in which these systems operated, and showed you had no idea whatsoever how temperatures were controlled throughout the spacecraft.

2) Many of the posters argue that it wasn't cold that was the worry but rather heat.

The fact you don’t understand that different configurations and environmental conditions lead to different thermal concerns is your problem, not ours.  The real problem, though, is that you are refusing to learn.

(Which I knew many would argue prior to posting my questions.)

You came to a forum peopled with engineers and knowledgeable laymen, and are spouting ignorant nonsense.  Of course people are disagreeing with you, but they’re also trying to help you learn. 

...But what about A13? They felt things getting colder not hotter. So either posters here are correct, and the astronauts were lying. Or the A13 Astronauts are correct and the posters here are wrong? Which is it?

The correct answer is neither, but instead that you don’t understand why this happened.  The problem is that you refuse to learn anything, but that’s your problem, not ours.  However, should you decide determined ignorance is no longer a good look, we’ll be happy to help you.

Offline ApolloEnthusiast

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #107 on: September 10, 2019, 12:21:28 AM »
Sorry, I should have said 7 years of development (from 1961-1968 Apollo8)
So space travel development begins with a fully functional, man rated Redstone rocket for Al Shepard to ride?  No development was necessary to get to that point?  They just popped a Mercury Capsule off the shelf that also apparently required no development time...

Claiming 7 years is not much less ridiculous than your 5 year claim earlier. 

Accurately assessing the actual development time to take people to the Moon for the first time isn't something that requires any technical knowledge.  You have no excuse for coming into a discussion like this with preformed conclusions and little to no actual knowledge to support those conclusions.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2019, 12:23:53 AM by ApolloEnthusiast »

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3363
    • Clavius
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #108 on: September 10, 2019, 12:23:20 AM »
It still doesn't change the fact (or why) after 50 years they have not used "this technology" on one vehicle, one craft, or one program in which man has left earth's orbit.

Because "technology" is not just some magically fungible quantity.  And because there's no consistent mandate to do so.  As you have been told, manned space flight capability is not just something that you can keep in the attic and dust off with minimal effort when you decide you want to use it again.

Quote
Trump says we are going to the moon just recently. Then someone "kicked" him and now we are instead going to Mars. That should buy another 20 years of time.

That sort of thing is part of the problem.  Developing a system to go to the Moon is not the same as developing a system to go to Mars.  When political directives and funding changes with each new administration or Congress, or even more frequently, programs that take several years to accomplish cannot proceed.  If, two years into a 10-year development plan, a new goal is set that requires a different 10-year development effort, you don't get to apply the two years you already spent trying to achieve some different goal.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline sts60

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 398
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #109 on: September 10, 2019, 12:25:45 AM »
Recommendation: Let’s not indulge jr Knowing’s latest gish gallops until he addresses his errors about the LM on the lunar surface.

Offline ApolloEnthusiast

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #110 on: September 10, 2019, 12:32:49 AM »
Recommendation: Let’s not indulge jr Knowing’s latest gish gallops until he addresses his errors about the LM on the lunar surface.
Sorry, I'm very pessimistic about him addressing any errors in this thread when he hasn't acknowledged his errors regarding regolith from March, or his errors regarding plume deflectors in his thread from last December...

Offline jr Knowing

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #111 on: September 10, 2019, 12:54:09 AM »
Hi LunarOrbit,

At the risk of offending a fellow Canadian who happens to be the administrator :) , I will tread lightly.

I think you are incorrect in your analogy. I believe Ford could do a one off 1969 Mustang in a week if they wanted. And they could retool a production plant in 6 months for an assembly line production car if they wanted. Toyota just down the road from me did that just last year. They changed the line from a car to a truck.

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3363
    • Clavius
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #112 on: September 10, 2019, 12:58:14 AM »
And they could retool a production plant in 6 months for an assembly line production car if they wanted.

How long do you think tool design and retooling takes in aerospace?
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline jr Knowing

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #113 on: September 10, 2019, 01:05:14 AM »
Hi Lunar Orbit,

To take your analogy one step further. Ask somebody to build a handheld calculator in 1970 and now 50 years later. In 1970 (or 1975) , TI would build some monster hand held that had little computing power. Today, some company in some offshore country is pumping out calculators for 3 dollars that is infinitely more powerful (and smaller) than 50 years ago. The point is, once the technology exists, it advances and flourishes. Apollo Technology, on the other hand, seems to have entered a black hole from which no man has left earth's orbit since.  Sure you could argue that America has no political will, but there sure others, state and private, who do. Yet no one has even gone for a "spin" 10000 miles out.

Offline sts60

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 398
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #114 on: September 10, 2019, 01:05:43 AM »
Hi LunarOrbit,

At the risk of offending a fellow Canadian who happens to be the administrator :) , I will tread lightly..

When will you address your mistaken claims about the LM on the lunar surface? 

Offline AtomicDog

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #115 on: September 10, 2019, 01:06:07 AM »
Hi LunarOrbit,

At the risk of offending a fellow Canadian who happens to be the administrator :) , I will tread lightly.

I think you are incorrect in your analogy. I believe Ford could do a one off 1969 Mustang in a week if they wanted. And they could retool a production plant in 6 months for an assembly line production car if they wanted. Toyota just down the road from me did that just last year. They changed the line from a car to a truck.

So, with the demand for a classic car like the 1969 Mustang, why hasn't Ford started the production line for such an easy task? Think carefully before you answer.
"There is no belief, however foolish, that will not gather its faithful adherents who will defend it to the death." - Isaac Asimov

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 3363
    • Clavius
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #116 on: September 10, 2019, 01:09:37 AM »
The point is, once the technology exists, it advances and flourishes.

"Technology" is not a magically fungible thing.

Quote
Apollo Technology, on the other hand, seems to have entered a black hole from which no man has left earth's orbit since.

What is your rationale for concluding that manufacturing mass-produced consumer electronics is on the same footing as small-batch manned spacecraft?

Quote
Sure you could argue that America has no political will, but there sure others, state and private, who do.

Such as?

Quote
Yet no one has even gone for a "spin" 10000 miles out.

What makes you think your goals are their goals?
« Last Edit: September 10, 2019, 01:11:26 AM by JayUtah »
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline AtomicDog

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #117 on: September 10, 2019, 01:10:56 AM »
Yet no one has even gone for a "spin" 10000 miles out.

Name the purpose for taking a crewed vehicle 10,000 miles out that cannot be accomplished in low earth orbit.
"There is no belief, however foolish, that will not gather its faithful adherents who will defend it to the death." - Isaac Asimov

Offline jr Knowing

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #118 on: September 10, 2019, 01:15:18 AM »
Hi Jay,

How long do you think it takes to re-tool right through to final production? Well given they already produced this and have the technology/blueprints, clearly a lot shorter time than it took in the 60's. Again, I am not even talking about the moon per se. For instance, if the plan over the years has been to go back to the moon, or now Mars, you would think that they would love to do some testing in outer space near earth just to understand the environment better. But no, nothing, nada. In 50 years. Does that make sense to you?

Offline jr Knowing

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 127
Re: The Absence of Airlocks
« Reply #119 on: September 10, 2019, 01:23:44 AM »
Hi Atomic Dog

Why go out 10000 miles? Test steering in a vacuum for one.