Author Topic: The official audio Record of Apollo 11  (Read 12896 times)

Offline DAKDAK

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 60
  • BANNED
The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« on: May 10, 2012, 03:48:38 AM »
Since the people on this site reply and explain in great detail the questions I think that alot of people have about the Apollo program I might as well ask if there is a plausible explanation for a few other of the many inconsistencies that I noticed about the Apollo program. When Apollo 11 blasted off from Kennedy space center Neil Armstrong was clearly heard saying Houston we have a roll program. And that has been standard ever since. Of course if you watch the extremely edited versions of  any Apollo  liftoffs now the massive Saturn V rockets are silent. How is this possible?I was there and we had to be kept several miles away due to the noise and yet supposedly Neil was actually inside the rocket only a couple hundred feet from the massive Saturn V engines The  shuttle pilots say that the noise and vibration of pulling several "G"s is all consuming and the shuttle should be less noisy than a Saturn V. I  also read that the heat shield on the command module was designed to melt away during reentry this seems odd since today heat shields are not designed to melt but just the opposite. Finally,Were the large inflatable balls and the orange float on the bottom of the command modules already on the command module? Or did the divers have to put them on before they got the astronauts out if so where were they kept during flight (I am referring to the big floatable balls and the orange tube float underneath the command module in all the recovery pictures) I hope I am not posting too much or wasting your time with seemingly dumb questions but I really would like to know


[Post restored by LunarOrbit]
« Last Edit: June 06, 2012, 08:37:26 PM by LunarOrbit »

Online raven

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1361
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #1 on: May 10, 2012, 04:11:32 AM »
Actually, except for the former NASA Space Shuttle, the now sadly destroyed Soviet Buran, and the unmanned X-37, all which used a system of reusable tiles for their heat shield, all spacecraft, for Mercury and Vostok to Soyuz and Shenzou use a system in a disposable heat shield melts and burns away, taking the heat of re-entry with it.
As for the noise, astronauts and cosmonauts on the former shuttle, and Soyuz also communicate with their respective launch centres. The microphones in all cases are right by their mouths, and are designed to pick up noises only right near by.

Offline Jason Thompson

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1339
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #2 on: May 10, 2012, 05:07:45 AM »
Of course if you watch the extremely edited versions of  any Apollo  liftoffs now the massive Saturn V rockets are silent.

No they're not.

Quote
How is this possible?I was there and we had to be kept several miles away due to the noise and yet supposedly Neil was actually inside the rocket only a couple hundred feet from the massive Saturn V engines

He was also sealed inside a multi-layered spacecraft, wearing a spacesuit with a thick lexan helmet sealed over his head, and a microphone set designed especially for use in noisy environments that was right next to his mouth. It had an excellent ability to pick up sound from something very close by, and an excellent ability not to be bothered by extraneous noise that would be somewhat muted by the multiple layers of spacecraft walls and suit helmets.

Quote
I  also read that the heat shield on the command module was designed to melt away during reentry this seems odd since today heat shields are not designed to melt but just the opposite.

Actually this is normal. It's called ablation, and it works by cherring and burning away, which takes away the heat. In the whole of the space program of both the US and the Soviet Union right up until the shuttle program, only the first two sub-orbital Mercury spacecraft used a heat shield system that was not ablative. Soyuz has been using it reliably for over 40 years now. The Chinese Shenzhous spacecrfat also uses an ablative heat shield. It's a well-known, tried and tested, and highly reliable way of protecting something from the heat of a re-entry.

Quote
Finally,Were the large inflatable balls and the orange float on the bottom of the command modules already on the command module?

The large inflatable balls on the apex of the command module are indeed stowed inside the upper section around the tunnel, alongside the parachutes. The command module, when in the water, had two possible stable floating configurations. One was what was known as 'stable 2', which is the upright position used to allow the astronauts to exit the spacecraft. Unfortunately the other, known as 'stable 1', was upside down in the water with the hatch submerged. Since that is obviously not a good position for the astronuats to be able to exit the spacecraft, those three inflatable spheres would be inflated, and the buoyancy they provided was enough to flip the command module over to stable 2 and allow egress.

The large flotation collar was attached by the recovery personnel prior to opening the hatch, to ensure that the command module remained stable and upright during egress.

Quote
I hope I am not posting too much or wasting your time with seemingly dumb questions but I really would like to know

There is nothing wrong with the questions. I would point out that you raised several points in your first post that were responded to and you have yet to address them. It would be appreicated if you would do so.
"There's this idea that everyone's opinion is equally valid. My arse! Bloke who was a professor of dentistry for forty years does NOT have a debate with some eejit who removes his teeth with string and a door!"  - Dara O'Briain

Offline Chew

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 545
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #3 on: May 10, 2012, 08:39:32 AM »
Since the people on this site reply and explain in great detail the questions I think that alot of people have about the Apollo program I might as well ask if there is a plausible explanation for a few other of the many inconsistencies that I noticed about the Apollo program. When Apollo 11 blasted off from Kennedy space center Neil Armstrong was clearly heard saying Houston we have a roll program. And that has been standard ever since. Of course if you watch the extremely edited versions of  any Apollo  liftoffs now the massive Saturn V rockets are silent. How is this possible?

Have you ever flown on a commercial airliner? Have you ever stood next to a commercial airliner when its jet are running? It is deafening. You will notice the ground crew is wearing hearing protection. Yet the passengers inside do not need hearing protection.

Offline Ranb

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #4 on: May 10, 2012, 09:15:52 AM »
When Apollo 11 blasted off from Kennedy space center Neil Armstrong was clearly heard saying Houston we have a roll program.

If you take a ride in a small general aviation aircraft like a Cessna 152 or 172, you will most likely be wearing a headset with hearing protectors and a microphone.  The microphone has to be very close (sometimes touching) to your lips to pick up your voice.  While you will hear some engine and air noise coming over the mic to the headset, the other person's voice is far louder.  This is how it works.

Try separating your thoughts and questions into separate paragraphs, this makes it easier for other people to follow when reading your posts.

Reading your posts makes it look like you have very little experience with the world other than what you see on TV or your computer.  It will do you very good to get out into the world and experience something once in a while.

Ranb

Offline sts60

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #5 on: May 10, 2012, 11:41:35 AM »
DAKDAK wrote:
Since the people on this site reply and explain in great detail the questions I think that alot of people have about the Apollo program I might as well ask if there is a plausible explanation for a few other of the many inconsistencies that I noticed about the Apollo program.

DAKDAK, what about all the "inconsistencies" you already brought up which were debunked in the "I don't know..." thread?  Would you please address these issues before wandering off to new topics?

When Apollo 11 blasted off from Kennedy space center Neil Armstrong was clearly heard saying Houston we have a roll program. And that has been standard ever since. Of course if you watch the extremely edited versions of  any Apollo  liftoffs now the massive Saturn V rockets are silent. How is this possible?

First, your claim is wrong.  There are plenty of available versions of Apollo liftoffs - online, no effort or expense required - with the roar of the launch vehicle.  This claim is so easily debunked and so obviously incorrect I am surprised you would make it.

Second, why does it matter?  Why would you compare "heavily-edited" versions to other, presumably more complete, versions?

I was there and we had to be kept several miles away due to the noise

Due to the explosion hazard, primarily.

and yet supposedly Neil was actually inside the rocket only a couple hundred feet from the massive Saturn V engines

Can you think of any differences between being inside the spacecraft atop the launch vehicle, and being outside it?

Here's a hint for you.  I cannot stand near a 747 at takeoff power without hearing damage.  But I can sit inside the aircraft a few dozen feet from the engines quite comfortably.

The  shuttle pilots say that the noise and vibration of pulling several "G"s is all consuming and the shuttle should be less noisy than a Saturn V.

I've worked with a number of Shuttle astronauts.  Please provide a reference for your claim. 

I  also read that the heat shield on the command module was designed to melt away

Wrong.  It was designed to char in a very specific way - ablative shielding.

during reentry this seems odd since today heat shields are not designed to melt but just the opposite.

No.  Some do (e.g., X-37B); some don't (Russian Soyuz, Chinese Shenzhou, U.S. Orion...). 

... I hope I am not posting too much or wasting your time with seemingly dumb questions but I really would like to know

You are certainly not posting too much, nor wasting time, but you really should go back and address the claims you made (and the rebuttals to them) in the "I don't know..." thread; I for one would like you to address my rebuttals in this post.   

Offline JayUtah

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 2708
    • Clavius
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #6 on: May 10, 2012, 02:01:05 PM »
I might as well ask if there is a plausible explanation for a few other of the many inconsistencies that I noticed about the Apollo program.

Of course there are.  And it should be telling you, after all this, that your idea of what constitutes an "inconsistency" is really just something you didn't know about Apollo before.

Yes, you may have been taught only the rudiments of space engineering in school.  That's because only a very few people at your school go on to study space engineering and become experts.  I flounder through business accounting because I only ever learned the rudiments.  I rely on the expertise of the few others at my school who went on to study corporate accounting and know its details intimately.

The conspiracy theorists who are feeding you bad information don't know anything but the rudiments either -- if even that.  But they make an art out of trying to delve into the details, only from a completely ignorant (or worse, solely common-sensical) point of view.  They talk, for example, about "radiation" when they themselves know practically nothing about it.

Quote
When Apollo 11 blasted off from Kennedy space center Neil Armstrong was clearly heard saying Houston we have a roll program.

Yes.  He's speaking into the best noise-cancellation microphone that Plantronics made at the time, pressed against his lips, inside a bubble helmet inside a heavily insulated and shielded command module 300 feet away from the engines -- and, most importantly, in front of the engines.

Quote
Of course if you watch the extremely edited versions of  any Apollo  liftoffs now the massive Saturn V rockets are silent. How is this possible?

Because they're heavily edited.  Or more likely, because you're looking at something that ultimately traces its lineage back to film, and film doesn't naturally record sound.  The pad cameras, for example, don't record sound.  They're just 16mm data-acquisition cameras in hardened enclosures.

Quote
I was there and we had to be kept several miles away due to the noise...

Not so much noise as explosion and crash hazard.

You've already been shown how ordinary jet engines are deafening if you happen to be around them outside, but are noticeably quieter as heard from the airplane cabin just a few feet away.  I also mentioned it matters what direction you are in relation to the engine.

Experienced airline passengers learn that the rear of the cabin is considerably noisier than the front of the cabin, in airframes with wing-mounted engines.  Why?  Because if you're seated aft of the wing, you get the directional noise produced by the engine's tailcone -- or more accurately, by the effect of the exhaust stream hitting the ambient.  This tends to radiate outward (i.e., at right angles to the direction of thrust) and rearward (i.e., behind the plane) but not so much forward (i.e., the forward part of the cabin and the flight deck).

Observing a Saturn V launch, you were at right angles to the thrust axis, and then likely somewhat behind it.  Where was Neil and company?  They were on the "flight deck" forward of the engine exhaust.

Quote
The  shuttle pilots say that the noise and vibration of pulling several "G"s is all consuming and the shuttle should be less noisy than a Saturn V.

Where did you hear that?

Quote
I  also read that the heat shield on the command module was designed to melt away...

No.  Melting means changing from a solid to a liquid without altering the chemical composition.  The ablative heat shield on the CM chars, which means to change chemical composition in a material by means of applying heat.  The heat consumed by the chemical reaction keeps it from penetrating further.  Also the product of the reaction is a species of gas that has excellent thermal insulation properties.  The plasma heat generated forward by the compression of gases has a hard time penetrating this layer of gas, char, and sheer bulk.

Quote
this seems odd since today heat shields are not designed to melt but just the opposite.

No, only the space shuttle had a non-consumable thermal protection system, and that's because it was designed to be reused.

Quote
Were the large inflatable balls and the orange float on the bottom of the command modules already on the command module?

They were up on the ELS ring, near the parachutes.  No, they were not contained within the pressurized volume of the spacecraft.
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams

Offline cjameshuff

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 326
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #7 on: May 10, 2012, 03:42:26 PM »
Quote
this seems odd since today heat shields are not designed to melt but just the opposite.

No, only the space shuttle had a non-consumable thermal protection system, and that's because it was designed to be reused.

Notable recent examples using ablatives: the Soyuz capsules (which still fly regularly), Stardust, Genesis, Hayabusa, Fobos-Grunt (failed on launch, but was intended to return samples), all of the Mars landers, China's Shenzhou spacecraft, the Indian SRE, the Indian ISRO (which hasn't flown yet), the SpaceX Dragon (which has a reusable ablative heat shield), and the Orion MPCV. This isn't an exhaustive list.

Ablatives aren't some idea cooked up for Apollo and then abandoned, they're the standard approach to bringing things back to Earth's surface from orbit. In fact, the material to be used on the MPCV (if it ever flies) is an updated version of the Avcoat material used on the Apollo command modules. The only new spacecraft that's actually flying with a non-ablative heat shield appears to be the X-37.

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 2853
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #8 on: May 10, 2012, 03:48:41 PM »
I hope I am not posting too much or wasting your time with seemingly dumb questions but I really would like to know
We don't mind answering questions provided that you actually pay attention to our answers.

I, for one, seriously question whether you do. It might help if you were to answer the questions we pose to you.

Offline DAKDAK

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 60
  • BANNED
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2012, 11:10:58 PM »
Quote from: ka9q
[quote authorDAKDAK]
I hope I am not posting too much or wasting your time with seemingly dumb questions but I really would like to know
We don't mind answering questions provided that you actually pay attention to our answers.

I, for one, seriously question whether you do. It might help if you were to answer the questions we pose to you.[/quote]

I definitely want to reply to each response but the first time I tried I guess I sent the reply to someones personal mailbox and that person seemed upset is this the proper place and way to reply?
I also have to think about my replies more because I dont want to sound like an idiot,and I dont know the answers that is why I asked the questions. I will say that the replies I have received so far are very convincing and I am definitely rethinking the whole Apollo subject. I also travel for work alot(not an excuse just saying)


[Post restored by LunarOrbit]
« Last Edit: June 06, 2012, 08:40:16 PM by LunarOrbit »

Offline ka9q

  • Neptune
  • ****
  • Posts: 2853
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #10 on: May 11, 2012, 11:49:02 PM »
Yes, this is the proper place.

Don't worry about sounding like an idiot just for asking questions. Any question intended to help improve your understanding of something is a perfectly good question, no matter how basic. That's how all of us learn. So ask away.

But what does make you sound like an idiot is to say "I'm convinced Apollo was faked" and in the same breath admit that you have absolutely no basis for this conclusion other than your emotions because you don't know how any of it worked. Or perhaps you think it was faked simply because you don't understand it.

There's a lot of talent, experience and knowledge on this board. Just about everyone is willing to patiently answer your questions as long as you're sincere about learning. But if you make it obvious that you're not really listening but are just mining for quotes to support your predetermined position, then don't expect much sympathy.



Offline Glom

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 971
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #11 on: May 11, 2012, 11:56:50 PM »
It would probably be easier to handle all the replies if you didn't throw out so many things at once.

Ask one question. It will be answered. Then ask the next.

Offline gillianren

  • Uranus
  • ****
  • Posts: 1650
    • My Letterboxd journal
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #12 on: May 12, 2012, 02:56:34 AM »
But what does make you sound like an idiot is to say "I'm convinced Apollo was faked" and in the same breath admit that you have absolutely no basis for this conclusion other than your emotions because you don't know how any of it worked. Or perhaps you think it was faked simply because you don't understand it.

I cannot agree with this enough.  Seriously, if you know you don't know all that much about Apollo, what makes you think you know enough about it to know that it was faked?  If people who obviously know a ton about Apollo don't think it was faked, what makes you think you know better than they do?
"This sounds like a job for Bipolar Bear . . . but I just can't seem to get out of bed!"

"Conspiracy theories are an irresistible labour-saving device in the face of complexity."  --Henry Louis Gates

Offline sts60

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 383
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #13 on: May 12, 2012, 03:23:41 AM »
DAKDAK, it's not a problem to take time between replies if you need to, as long as you're reading and digesting the answers you're getting.

Offline scooter

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 72
Re: The official audio Record of Apollo 11
« Reply #14 on: May 12, 2012, 10:18:48 AM »
DAK, the folks here know an awful lot about spaceflight, Apollo, engineering and everything else that made Apollo "work". Frankly, some of it seems like magic to me, but to them it's just another engineering problem.

I mean, they built 1st stage engines with fuel pumps which delivered tons of fuel per second to the engines. And the engines could slightly, and accurately,"gimbal" while putting out over a million pounds of thrust each. They could determine the position and velocity of the spacecraft while in lunar orbit with amazing accuracy. Then a heat shield to protect them from reentry heating just inches thick...and they maneuvered their craft using it's lifting body characteristics to make near pinpoint landings every time.

It's all amazing stuff, no doubt about it. And it's a real testament to the smart and imaginative folks that put it all together, solving the innumerable problems one by one.

Please do stick around and ask questions. The people here know the answers, several are in the space flight business.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2012, 10:24:13 AM by scooter »