Page 10 of 19 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 300 of 545

Thread: Does anyone still believe that Apollo 11 landed on the moon after Chang'E-4

  1. #271
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    254
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    Dude, cannot you see the AP8 Proton map above? Does that look like the Braeunig's deception?
    Pathetic. Utterly pathetic, there was no deception, no proof of any deception from you and the proton map is not created by Braeunig - I have presented no alternative to it, it comes from his page!

  2. #272
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    254
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    Inclination is always in relation to the earth's geographical equator. You can move the origin of that line from an longitude and latitude you like but the angle to a line running through the equator is always the inclination angle. Geomagnetical equator is not the same as the geographical equator and everyone knows the VAB centers around the geomagnetical equator.
    This is tedious. Whilst Apollo follows a 30 degree inclination to the equator, the inclination of the geomagnetic is away from the departure point.

    This is not a true landmass position representation, but the red line is the inclination to geographical and with the tilt of 11.5 degrees applied, the yellow line to left and right is the geomagnetic centre. The craft for illustration purposes departs to the right. 41.5 degrees to the VAB, 30 to to the equator.


  3. #273
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    I think the correct path through the VAB can be determine by taking an illustration of the AP8 Proton flux map and shifting the map 11.5 degrees to the geomagnetic equator and then plotting a straight line from the TLI's longitude and latitude at an inclination of 30 degrees from the geographical equator. Calculating the radiation received during a VAB transit is above my skill set but if it is a positive number then it proves that Apollo 11 never left LEO.
    Show your work not verbiage, backed up with verifiable reasons why your chosen tracjecroy is correct, I think is not verifiable. If calculating is above your skill set then learn the basics so it is within your skill set.
    The number your calculate will be positive, but show how that proves A11 never left LEO. Continued comments as this do not make it(them) true.
    You still have issues with 3-D geometry.

  4. #274
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    Maybe you came in late. I presented a NASA document that stated during the Apollo era the GCR was 1mrad/hr and it would be .6 on the lunar surface. This evolved from that simple statement. Now if you contest that then show me what you have.
    The document indicated approximate values not absolute. Once you accept this concept many of your questions evaporate.

  5. #275
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by Clanger View Post
    Pathetic. Utterly pathetic, there was no deception, no proof of any deception from you and the proton map is not created by Braeunig - I have presented no alternative to it, it comes from his page!
    Braeunig's map is a deception. Use the AE8 Proton map.

  6. #276
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by Clanger View Post
    This is tedious. Whilst Apollo follows a 30 degree inclination to the equator, the inclination of the geomagnetic is away from the departure point.

    This is not a true landmass position representation, but the red line is the inclination to geographical and with the tilt of 11.5 degrees applied, the yellow line to left and right is the geomagnetic centre. The craft for illustration purposes departs to the right. 41.5 degrees to the VAB, 30 to to the equator.

    No. The geomagnetic equator crosses the geographical equator. It is 11.5 degrees offset. To make the drawing correct you need to rotate the VAB up 11.5 degrees.

  7. #277
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    Opinion?
    Look at your post count in this thread. As far as being able to learn how to calculate, that depends on one willingness to learn.
    Your logical fallacy, everyone can spot that one.

  8. #278
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Mare Crisium
    Posts
    689
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    If it helps, I have some diagrams in my little article How Apollo Got To The Moon which illustrate the key concepts here.

    Grant Hutchison
    Great resource. Thank you.

  9. #279
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    The document indicated approximate values not absolute. Once you accept this concept many of your questions evaporate.
    I am good with approximates but I point out that if the range was great they would have assigned a plus or minus and yet they did not. You have nothing so you choose this hill to die on? Pick a value that you like and let's move on.

  10. #280
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    20,805
    Quote Originally Posted by tusenfem View Post
    I have not read it, but I think this paper by Rahmanifard et al. (2020), Galactic Cosmic Radiation in the Interplanetary Space Through a Modern Secular Minimum

    (sorry for the big bold) would be interesting in this discussion. (pdf available)
    ThroughaModernSecularMini
    mum"
    Well, I noticed. Thanks.
    It's very interesting, and I'm trying to get my head around it. It raises the issue that the specific manner in which "dose" is extracted from the six CRaTER sensors is also important.
    Things do seem to have rather moved on, however. And not in a good way. Sigh.

    Grant Hutchison

  11. #281
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    20,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Selenite View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    If it helps, I have some diagrams in my little article How Apollo Got To The Moon which illustrate the key concepts here.

    Grant Hutchison
    Great resource. Thank you.
    Glad it's of interest.

    Grant Hutchison

  12. #282
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    20,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Clanger View Post
    This is tedious. Whilst Apollo follows a 30 degree inclination to the equator, the inclination of the geomagnetic is away from the departure point.

    This is not a true landmass position representation, but the red line is the inclination to geographical and with the tilt of 11.5 degrees applied, the yellow line to left and right is the geomagnetic centre. The craft for illustration purposes departs to the right. 41.5 degrees to the VAB, 30 to to the equator.
    Here's a diagram of the situation. Vantage point over the Pacific, with Cape Kennedy on the eastern limb:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	500px-Van_Allen_radiation_belt.svg_-e1561672990877.png 
Views:	20 
Size:	20.2 KB 
ID:	26078
    Here's a view of the ecliptic, lunar orbit and Apollo 11 orbit at the time of launch, using real orbital and orientation data throughout, same viewpoint, Earth geographical latitude and longitude indicated by the grid:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	planes.png 
Views:	22 
Size:	95.0 KB 
ID:	26079
    Note that the orientation is slightly different in the two views--Earth's equator horizontal in the first, the ecliptic horizontal in the second. In the unlikely event anyone has trouble orientating themselves because of that, I'll happily rotate one diagram through 23.5 degrees to match the other in detail.

    Grant Hutchison

  13. #283
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    Here's a diagram of the situation. Vantage point over the Pacific, with Cape Kennedy on the eastern limb:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	500px-Van_Allen_radiation_belt.svg_-e1561672990877.png 
Views:	20 
Size:	20.2 KB 
ID:	26078
    Here's a view of the ecliptic, lunar orbit and Apollo 11 orbit at the time of launch, using real orbital and orientation data throughout, same viewpoint, Earth geographical latitude and longitude indicated by the grid:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	planes.png 
Views:	22 
Size:	95.0 KB 
ID:	26079
    Note that the orientation is slightly different in the two views--Earth's equator horizontal in the first, the ecliptic horizontal in the second. In the unlikely event anyone has trouble orientating themselves because of that, I'll happily rotate one diagram through 23.5 degrees to match the other in detail.

    Grant Hutchison
    I point out that it really does not matter the location of cape Canaveral (The launch point) because the rocket goes into orbit and circles the earth and then launches into TLI from a designated point. To truly grasp the picture, you would need the latitude and longitude, and the inclination to ascertain the actual path.
    https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apo...Orbit_Data.htm

  14. #284
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    254
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    Braeunig's map is a deception. Use the AE8 Proton map.
    And again with this ridiculous observation, The AE8 Proton map was used on the page you are afraid to visit or offer any rebuttal to!

  15. #285
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    20,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    I point out that it really does not matter the location of cape Canaveral (The launch point) because the rocket goes into orbit and circles the earth and then launches into TLI from a designated point. To truly grasp the picture, you would need the latitude and longitude, and the inclination to ascertain the actual path.
    Actually, the location of Kennedy is really important, because it sets limits on the inclination of the orbit to the geomagnetic equator. Which was really important.
    What you see in the second diagram are real-world data for all the relevant orbital planes associated with Apollo 11. By the time of TLI the Earth will have rotated somewhat, but otherwise everything is as it was at TLI. The translunar orbit was in essentially the same plane as the Earth parking orbit (within a fraction of a degree), because plane changes need more delta-v, which needs more fuel, which needs more launch mass, which needs even more fuel.

    Grant Hutchison

  16. #286
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    Actually, the location of Kennedy is really important, because it sets limits on the inclination of the orbit to the geomagnetic equator. Which was really important.
    What you see in the second diagram are real-world data for all the relevant orbital planes associated with Apollo 11. By the time of TLE the Earth will have rotated somewhat, but otherwise everything is as it was. The translunar orbit was in essentially the same plane as the Earth parking orbit (within a fraction of a degree), because plane changes need more delta-v, which needs more fuel, which needs more launch mass, which needs even more fuel.

    Grant Hutchison
    I don't see it but I will take your word on it. From a layman's perspective it would seem that in launch the rocket is aimed in a direction to set the plane of the orbital rotation and could be adjusted to any launch location but what do I know.

  17. #287
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by Clanger View Post
    And again with this ridiculous observation, The AE8 Proton map was used on the page you are afraid to visit or offer any rebuttal to!
    No it wasn't but if you post the AE8 proton flux map that you are referring to I could see the undeniable proof.

  18. #288
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    20,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    I don't see it but I will take your word on it. From a layman's perspective it would seem that in launch the rocket is aimed in a direction to set the plane of the orbital rotation and could be adjusted to any launch location but what do I know.
    You don't launch a rocket to the west on a planet rotating to the east, unless you want to use an unfeasible quantity of fuel. Any launch azimuth other than due east will use more fuel than due east. So there are mass constraints on the direction in which you can launch and still get to orbit safely. For Apollo-Saturn, there was a narrow range of accessible azimuths, like this:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	canaveral.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	407.0 KB 
ID:	26080
    That resulted in possible orbits with a narrow range of inclinations, from the latitude of Kennedy to a few degrees farther north.
    Apollo 11 launched early in the launch window, so with a northerly azimuth, and so ended up in an orbit with an inclination a little over thirty degrees:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	detail.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	718.0 KB 
ID:	26081
    And that's what effectively establishes the plane of the TLI. Which in turn establishes the trajectory of the spacecraft in relation to the geomagnetic equator at TLI. Like this (red line - spacecraft, cyan line - lunar orbit):
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	VAB1.png 
Views:	12 
Size:	336.2 KB 
ID:	26082

    Grant Hutchison

  19. #289
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    I am good with approximates but I point out that if the range was great they would have assigned a plus or minus and yet they did not. You have nothing so you choose this hill to die on? Pick a value that you like and let's move on.
    You don't need to ad plus or minus when one defines a value as average. The value is approximately .24 and I'll stick with that value. A11 recorded radiation falls as a value lower than the average. So lets move on and start calculating the radiation received from the VARB. BTW the depiction that Bob B. is a correct depiction of a three dimensional object on 2 dimensional media. You still can't understand 3-D geometry can you?

  20. #290
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    You don't need to ad plus or minus when one defines a value as average. The value is approximately .24 and I'll stick with that value. A11 recorded radiation falls as a value lower than the average. So lets move on and start calculating the radiation received from the VARB. BTW the depiction that Bob B. is a correct depiction of a three dimensional object on 2 dimensional media. You still can't understand 3-D geometry can you?
    Sure I can. We are obviously talking about two different things. If you believe the Apollo missions skirted the VAB as depicted by Bob B. then I want to sell you you some Game Stock futures.

  21. #291
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228

  22. #292
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    Sure I can. We are obviously talking about two different things. If you believe the Apollo missions skirted the VAB as depicted by Bob B. then I want to sell you you some Game Stock futures.
    I don't believe, I know just like all the times I have posted to you. Well there aren't any "Game Stock futures", so we know something else which you have no clue.

  23. #293
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    20,805
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    Sure I can. We are obviously talking about two different things. If you believe the Apollo missions skirted the VAB as depicted by Bob B. then I want to sell you you some Game Stock futures.
    See my diagrams. That's exactly how it worked.

    Grant Hutchison

  24. #294
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    This article is really good in describing the TLI and the path through the VAB. You will note that it travels through regions 3 magnitudes greater than the SAA.
    https://web.archive.org/web/20170728...ollo11-TLI.htm

  25. #295
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    This article is really good in describing the TLI and the path through the VAB. You will note that it travels through regions 3 magnitudes greater than the SAA.
    https://web.archive.org/web/20170728...ollo11-TLI.htm
    It is a good article, BTW, by the same man you defined as a NASA shill a few posts ago. What is your point? There are regions that have higher that Apollo did not traverse isn't there? Now point out to the audience the time it took to traverse across those values. For bonus points what was the total time across the VARB?

  26. #296
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    It is a good article, BTW, by the same man you defined as a NASA shill a few posts ago. What is your point? There are regions that have higher that Apollo did not traverse isn't there? Now point out to the audience the time it took to traverse across those values. For bonus points what was the total time across the VARB?
    A broken clock is right twice a day. When you consider the proton flux in the SAA is less than 400 protons.cm^2 and no region of the VAB other than the SAA is less than 1000 then it becomes obvious. When the ISS passes through the densest part of the SAA the astronauts have to move to specially shielded areas. The ISS has 40 gms/cm^2 shielding while the Apollo had roughly 7.

  27. #297
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    1,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    A broken clock is right twice a day. When you consider the proton flux in the SAA is less than 400 protons.cm^2 and no region of the VAB other than the SAA is less than 1000 then it becomes obvious. When the ISS passes through the densest part of the SAA the astronauts have to move to specially shielded areas. The ISS has 40 gms/cm^2 shielding while the Apollo had roughly 7.
    I have asked a number of times
    What is the travel time of the ISS across the SAA?
    What is the travel time of Apollo across the VARB?

  28. #298
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    I am prepared to calculate a very conservative VAB transit dose if we can agree on the peak proton flux of the SAA. I propose using a value from this proton map.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	SAA Proton Flux.png 
Views:	18 
Size:	277.4 KB 
ID:	26083

  29. #299
    Join Date
    Apr 2021
    Posts
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by bknight View Post
    I have asked a number of times
    What is the travel time of the ISS across the SAA?
    What is the travel time of Apollo across the VARB?
    I do not know but we can calculate them based on known speeds.
    The ISS travels at a constant speed and the Translunar speed is an ever decreasing one.

  30. #300
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Foul View Post
    The moon is a radiation source and rather than shielding background radiation, it raises it.
    An object can both a shield and a source. An example would be radiography camera with a depleted uranium shield. They read about 2 mr/hr empty but are very effective shielding for the source they contain.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •