40 years ago today we set off to land on the moon. Follow Apollo 11 all over again. Very cool stuff.
40 years ago today we set off to land on the moon. Follow Apollo 11 all over again. Very cool stuff.
Man, do I remember that. I was just a kid. We had a big console TV (probably a 23" screen) and I was glued to it watching as Neil Armstrong took that historic step, even though the picture was all black and white and fuzzy.
On a down note, the shuttle program is due to end in, IIRC, 14 months. There is no immediate replacement ready to launch. Damn. The latest information I have seen indicates testing this year and 2014 for the first launch of its replacement.
Yeah, the cities around the Cape are all scared. Lot's of high pay jobs are going away, real estate is even worse than the rest of Florida. Rocket scientists don't do well at McDonalds.
Jensenman wrote: The latest information I have seen indicates testing this year and 2014 for the first launch of its replacement.
This depends on the usual variables: presidential priorities, budget, and technological issues. This is also the heirarchy of importance.
Of the three, the last is the most difficult to predict, and the rate of development is dependent on the budget. Throw enough money at the program and the "gap" can shrink (see Mercury-Apollo). Some technology challenges can't be solved just by throwing more money at them. Because of the unique enviroments and parameters in which manned spacecraft operate, some problems aren't apparent until a great deal of effort is put into development. In other words, you don't know that a road has a dead end until you drive down it.
From the outside, the rate of development of a new manned spacecraft can be like watching water come to a boil. From the inside, the blind alleys, budget shortfalls, etc are equally frustrating.
One of the young guys that works in my shop actually believes that we never did land on the moon, that it was all filmed in a studio. Whoo boy.
My buddy (who's in his 50's) believes the moon landing was faked.
I say it's because of cheese.
We thought the moon was made of cheese. Went to the moon, no cheese. No-one has been back.
Shawn
haha I was goign to crank post about it being filmed in the studio... amazing what some people think/believe... right up with the concentration camps where faked people...
What the hell was Kennedy talking about in that famous clip that we always hear? "We choose to go to the moon! We choose to go to the moon, and do the other thing, before this decade is out." What other thing? What was he talking about?
confuZion3 wrote: What the hell was Kennedy talking about in that famous clip that we always hear? "We choose to go to the moon! We choose to go to the moon, and do the other thing, before this decade is out." What other thing? What was he talking about?
Marilyn Monroe?
confuZion3 wrote: What the hell was Kennedy talking about in that famous clip that we always hear? "We choose to go to the moon! We choose to go to the moon, and do the other thing, before this decade is out." What other thing? What was he talking about?
"Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the first waves of the industrial revolutions, the first waves of modern invention, and the first wave of nuclear power, and this generation does not intend to founder in the backwash of the coming age of space. We mean to be a part of it--we mean to lead it. For the eyes of the world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding." -JFK, Dallas 1962.
http://er.jsc.nasa.gov/seh/ricetalk.htm
Or maybe I just missed the point, and he really wanted to see that Rice vs Texas game.
EastCoastMojo wrote: One of the young guys that works in my shop actually believes that we never did land on the moon, that it was all filmed in a studio. Whoo boy.
I absolutely HATE those people. My aunt was IBM Federal Services, and was assigned to NASA from late Gemini (programmer) to early Shuttle (erganomics & layout). She helped write the Lunar Orbit Insertion program for Apollo 8. Family history says that she stayed awake from Launch Day until Lovell's voice came crackling back saying that the manuver had been successful. At that point, she jumped in her Chevelle, booked it over to our house (Lake Arthur, LA), and slept for about 36hrs straight.
One of 400,000 people who put humanity on the moon. There ain't enough cash in the world to bribe that many people to keep quiet.
Besides, if you have a laser big enough, you can still hit the reflectors they left on the surface:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/experiments/lrr/
Here's all the reply the "hoax" morons deserve:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ez-NpFVwQw&NR=1
Maybe for the 40th anniversary, I'll start a fund to insure shiny happy people like Sibrel actually get buried on the berkeleying moon.
My grandfather worked for Grummen on the lander. Somewhere i have a vintage poster that includes all the Signiture plates on that thing.
friedgreencorrado wrote: Here's all the reply the "hoax" morons deserve: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ez-NpFVwQw&NR=1
Youtube commenter said: "Neil Armstrong punched that guy first though."
PeteWW wrote:Jensenman wrote: The latest information I have seen indicates testing this year and 2014 for the first launch of its replacement.This depends on the usual variables: presidential priorities, budget, and technological issues. This is also the heirarchy of importance. Of the three, the last is the most difficult to predict, and the rate of development is dependent on the budget. Throw enough money at the program and the "gap" can shrink (see Mercury-Apollo). Some technology challenges can't be solved just by throwing more money at them. Because of the unique enviroments and parameters in which manned spacecraft operate, some problems aren't apparent until a great deal of effort is put into development. In other words, you don't know that a road has a dead end until you drive down it. From the outside, the rate of development of a new manned spacecraft can be like watching water come to a boil. From the inside, the blind alleys, budget shortfalls, etc are equally frustrating.
Pete, at the risk of a thread hijack here...
You sound like someone well educated on these matters. What do you think of the current Shuttle replacement program? I recall being horrified when Shuttle came along simply because we were considering flying people on something using solid propellant motors. Maybe I'm wrong, but I consider us lucky that Challenger was the only failure of the solids (regardless of how well they were engineered & fabricated).
IIRC, this whole Orion/Ares concept is just a modern version of a "capsule" flown on the top of an old Shuttle AP powder stack. I would have thought we would try to man-rate the Atlas V or something instead, just for the safety factor. You seem to be looking at these issues from a much better viewpoint than I am, and I'm curious as to what you think of it...
On a related note, the HBO miniseries From the Earth to the Moon is currently on sale on Amazon for $11.49. That's 12 hours of awesomeness for less than $1/hr.
Fried,
As you suggest, there are a number of people concerned about the risks of using Ares as the launch vehicle. Insider gossip site: http://rocketsandsuch.blogspot.com/
The launch vehicle is outside the scope of my work (I do design support for the Crew Module), so your comments and concerns are as educated as mine. For what it's worth, I also agree completely with you.
Perhaps the "Augustine" Commission will recommend, and the new NASA administrator will direct us to a man-rated EELV.
I remember reading that Buran was more advanced than the shuttle by quite a bit.
Why not just update Buran a bit and use it instead.
The Russians seem to be the experts ar heavy payload launch.
Shawn
PeteWW wrote: Fried, As you suggest, there are a number of people concerned about the risks of using Ares as the launch vehicle. Insider gossip site: http://rocketsandsuch.blogspot.com/ The launch vehicle is outside the scope of my work (I do design support for the Crew Module), so your comments and concerns are as educated as mine. For what it's worth, I also agree completely with you. Perhaps the "Augustine" Commission will recommend, and the new NASA administrator will direct us to a man-rated EELV.
Thanks, Pete. I gotta admit, after your other post, I had the impression you were actually part of the new program. I really hope I didn't get you in trouble by calling you out. I'm sure the new capsule will be a good one, no matter what she rides!
And yeah, I've been reading Cowing's "NASA Watch" for years.
Back on topic:
1.) Walter died:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/17/eveningnews/main5170556.shtml?tag=cbsContent;cbsCarousel
Irony for me is, my parents were NBC fans. I never saw Cronkite's coverage until years later.
2.) The LRO has imaged the Apollo landing sites, and it hasn't even reached it's final mapping orbit yet! People don't seem to realize that scientists are human too..I'll bet the flight team planned this from the moment they realized LOI would be so close to the 40th Anniversary.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html
Clay wrote: On a related note, the HBO miniseries From the Earth to the Moon is currently on sale on Amazon for $11.49. That's 12 hours of awesomeness for less than $1/hr.
And don't forget the book!
http://www.amazon.com/Man-Moon-Andrew-Chaikin/dp/0140272011
My paperback copy has copies of the porno in the Apollo 12 LM crew's cuff checklists.
You'll need to log in to post.