Moon Walkers.

[picowatt]

I see you have resorted to tactics as used by those like MH-quoting false bullshit. It is sad to see you resort to such tactics PW. I have never said I could design or construct a space flight ready vehicle. In faxt, I have clearly stated that I could not do that on my own-so please stop reverting to these tactics, with the intent on trying to discredit me-as that is just straight lying-and people that read this thread will see that.

I have made  a claim that I could design and build a lunar rover type vehicle-twice the vehicle at half the total cost--and I stand by my statement.

Once again-please stop posting lies.

Brad

A "lunar rover type vehicle" would, by definition, have to be suitable for use on the moon.  And, of course, it would have to get there somehow...

PW

[tinman]

I don't quote any BS that I am aware of.   Brad, you are clearly out of your league and PW knows what he is talking about and you don't when it comes to a lot of issues that have been put on the table.  You haven't made a credible case at all and the only people that are going to believe you are the same type of people that are convinced that the WTC towers were wired with explosives.

You are not wise enough to state when you are out of your league.  You are clearly not a mechanical engineer.

We shall see about that MH.
As i stated before,you are to bias to be making any comments toward the moon landing's.
In regards to the WTR-well enjoy,as funny as this may seem,it is absolutely true--right down to the military exercise being carried out not to far away,to simulate a terror attack by way of planes flying into buildings. It is also a fact that the point of impact at the pentagon just so happened to be the very same group[ of offices where the accounting of the missing billion's(or was it trillions?) of dollars by the military were taking place. I know-I know--it's all just coincidences

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l47D5ISemds

But this is far as we go in regards to 9/11,as this thread is about man going to the moon,and the conditions in which they managed to do what they can do today--!!that we know of!!

If anyone else posted what PW has posted,you would be onto them like a fly on sh-t.


Brad.

[picowatt]

If anyone else posted what PW has posted,you would be onto them like a fly on sh-t.

What is it that I have posted that you find so incredulous or lacking in veracity?

PW

[tinman]

A "lunar rover type vehicle" would, by definition, have to be suitable for use on the moon.  And, of course, it would have to get there somehow...

PW

Of course it would have to opperate on the moon,as if it didnt,then it wouldnt be a lunar rover

As far as it getting there-well that is of no concern to me. My job is to design,develop ,and test the vehicle. This is how it was,and this is why the cost were so high--so many different departments for one mission. The lunar rover's them self would have had a stream of different departments to bring to reality one vehicle. How it got to the moon was of no concern to them,as long as they stuck within size and weight requirements. This was really a big waste of money,and just go's to show how each person is limited by knowledge. As i said(and stand by),i could build twice the machine with half the budget. If i am going to be the designer,constructor,and tester of the vehicle,then i am entitled to half of what the total cost for each vehicle was-->4.5 million.

Anyway,lets go over a few things here,that has popped up in the thread. Lets work out this thermal 
issue the scientific way,in stead of just blindly posting stuff in order to stick to your need to believe.

First,lets recap on some of your comments toward me.
Quote Even though you have provided no credible evidence to support your assertions that the Apollo missions did not happen, what, exactly, would you accept as proof that the Apollo missions did happen?  What evidence would be sufficient to change what has become your "beliefs"?
Answer-evidence not supplied by NASA--and we are talking evidence,not word's-->as is expected from any one here making extraordinary claims. I might add that i have provided more evidence to disprove the !man on the moon! landing's than has been provided by anyone that thinks man did walk on the moon.

Quote: Like I said, the cost of the hardware to actually build the rovers was insignificant compared to the cost to design, test, and certify the operation of the rovers.  Please don't feel the need to start spouting what you believe to be a rover design suitable for launch to and operation on the moon.   Do you seriously think yourself qualified to perform even the thermodynamic analysis necessary to design your thermal management system?  Do you know how innovative and yet elegantly simple the rover's thermal management system was?

Well we will see about the thermal management needed. This we will do !if! you can put aside you need to believe that man walked on the moon. Lets use science in stead of being so bias PW.

Quote: The fact that you cannot see the engineering marvels used in the deigns of the very simple lunar rover used during Apollo only indicates that you do not understand the difficulty of the task.

The fact that you cannot use science due to being bias toward the subject at hand,only makes these determinations more difficult. I would of thought(hoped) that you PW,could look at this from a scientific point of view.

Quote: That you "think" you could do better or cheaper has no bearing on whether Apollo did or did not happen and only erodes your credibility.

And how dose it do that. What has the ability of being able to build a vehicle that will operate on the moons surface got to do with man being able to travel too and walk on the moon?. How did you manage to convert my claim of my ability to build a vehicle that will operate on the moon,to being the reason i believe man did not walk on the moon?. The claim is there were a few moon walking missions well before the lunar rovers,so i am lost how you came about that statement?.

Quote: But, how about before YOU go any further you address the refutation of your claims regarding the Van Allen belts?

This claim was not mine,it was the claim of both NASA commanders and engineers,and the fact back then they had no idea as to what the effects would be on the astronaut's--some of the astronauts did not even know they went through them-->how well trained were they?.

In regards to the astronauts staying warm during the night,and cool during the day.
Quote: This question can only be asked from a position of extreme ignorance of the subject matter.
Perhaps you should take the time to learn a bit more about the Apollo missions before trying to prove they did not happen...
Or perhaps it is you PW that needs to do a little more scientific research into dissipating heat in a vacuum ?--we shall see soon enough-->using science.

Quote: The best images to date of the Apollo landing sites are from LROC and what you have seen is as good as it gets (the image TK recently posted for example).

And would this kind of image be accepted to verify an OU device? How much do you guys hate grainy video's on the so called !free energy! devices--how much do guys like MH trash those types of video's as absolute rubbish. But here you are PW,MH,and TK,trying to now tell us that a picture like this proves we went to the moon-->do you see what i mean by being bias causes you to throw all your !otherwise! scientific stature out the window. Dose the image below prove that i went to the moon to verify the moon landing's. It took me 3 minutes (on windows paint of all programs) to paste in my lunar lander,and new rover track's.

Quote: Your lack of appreciation for the rover's engineering astounds me.  Go for it, show us your thermal management calculations and engineering solutions.
My research starts here PW-with you,and what you believe you know-or think you know. Once you understand the environment of space and the moon,you will begin to understand just how easy it is to make a lunar ready vehicle.

Quote: I would think that an "active" or "passive" mechanical engineer such as yourself (whatever that actually means) should be able to appreciate what goes into a design like the rover.  Even an appreciation for the complexity involved in just designing an appropriate "shake and bake" test seems to escape you.

Passive engineer--some one like MH,who sits in a chair in an office,and decides what will and will not work,based around what he has learnt from school and book's.
Active engineer-some one that installs the ready made product on site,that was constructed at an engineering workshop based around the passive engineers parameters,and then makes the modifications on site(along with his team of mechanical fitters) needed for that component to operate correctly in situation.
An active engineer is also an engineer that designs,builds,and installs equipment on site as needed.
So passive= desk jockey engineer
Active= hands on real world engineer.
Anyone that has installed machinery/equipment on site ,will know what im talking about.

Quote: As far as the surface temperature where the photo is placed, I do not know what it was at that specific time, do you?  However, like asking about how the astronauts survived at "night", if you did a bit of research, some of this would be way more obvious to you.
I am beginning to wonder if you pay any attention at all to what your shown PW. The research needed is in the picture. This is where some one like your self should be able to closely determine as to where the sun's position is. I can do that,why cant you?

I have been doing plenty of research PW,and i feel that you may need to do a little more your self--in stead of just relying on what NASA tells you.

Quote:  Astronauts have remarked, somewhat tongue in cheek, about how thin even the inner walls of the LEM were and that they were a bit concerned over how easily they might be punctured.  Nothing was made any heavier than it absolutely had to be.  Anywhere weight could be saved it was.  Space is not easy.

And you were worried about my lunar rover coping with the moons environment

Quote: And just exactly how can you determine what the flag is made from by just looking at it?
PW,if you cant tell the types and see the difference in different types of simple/everyday materials,then perhaps some glasses to improve your vision?.
Quote: Once again you demonstrate an extreme ignorance of the subject matter.
I do not think the ignorance is on my behalf PW.
Quote: In the vacuum of space or on the surface of the moon, there is no "air" to support conduction or generate convection.
I have already stated long before that the convection of heat is not possible in space or on the moon for the very reason you posted above. How ever,you are wrong about no conduction of heat in the subject matter at hand. Heat can be conducted from one material or surface to another,when those two materials have physical contact. This was in regards to your question as to how i would keep the drive motors cool on my lunar vehicle,and why i asked you how hot the surface of the moon would be in direct sun light. You seem to want it both ways PW,and we will come to that when we get to specific details in regards to dissipating heat. Remember,you have already stated that(for some reason?)heat can be dissipated out into the vacuum of space . Anyway,we will get into that soon enough.
Quote: Here on Earth, if the surface temperature were +200C, the air temperature would be very hot indeed, because air is a pretty good conductor of heat, particularly when compared to a vacuum.  Surely most are familiar with a vacuum thermos.
And bing-there is the money shot right there-->you have just contradicted your self,but yet unaware of it Hows things looking now MH?.

Anyway,that is enough for one post--onto the next where we look at heat dissipation.


Brad

[tinman]

Quote: I am sorry Tinman, but my respect for any intellectual prowess I may have credited you with in the past is dwindling rather quickly.  In fact, I am finding it hard to believe you were ever 27 years old.

Just insult after insult-hey PW.



Oh-in regards to my saying that the flags were of a nylon/plastic material
Quote: Actually, regarding the flags, it appears they were indeed off the shelf nylon flags:
Now who has been doing his research?. Are you one of the guys that has ever claimed that the flags where some sort of aluminum composite material ?,as being the reason they maintain that wrinkle shape,or appear to be blowing in the breeze?. So ,from the link you provided in regards to the flag.
Quote:The (Apollo 11's) flag is probably gone. Buzz Aldrin saw it knocked over by the rocket blast as he and Neil Armstrong left the moon 39 summers ago. Lying there in the lunar dust, unprotected from the sun's harsh ultraviolet rays, the flag's red and blue would have bleached white in no time. Over the years, the nylon would have turned brittle and disintegrated.
Quote: Historian Anne Platoff) believes the first two (flags) from Apollo 11 and 12 did not survive the ignition gases of the lunar liftoff ...
Are you happy with that information PW?.
Lets have a look at what that information tells us,and why you need to have the ability to take a really good look at what these !!so called!! experts are telling you. So they say that the flags red and blue colors would have bleached in no time,just because it was now lying on the surface of the moon,and not standing up. So,dose an object receive more heat energy standing up and receiving direct sun light,or more heat energy lying down on the surface of the moon (which is now shaded by the flag it self),and out of direct sun light?. Now,remember you said that the moons surface is a very poor conductor of heat,and so the area now shaded by the flag lying on top of it would not draw in much heat from the surrounding surface area-due to the poor conduction properties you stated. So if you have a good look at what they claim in that link you provided,you should be able to work out that it's crap,as the flag that is now lying down on the surface of the moon that is now shaded would not see anymore heat than it would standing up. In fact,it would only receive the bulk amount of heat from the sun,when the sun was in the noon(12 o.clock position,where as when it was standing up,it would receive the same dose of heat both in (what we would call) mornings and afternoons,and the least amount while the sun was in the mid day position.
Now-the really good part-and maybe you will see how these clowns continually contradict them selves.
Quote: Buzz Aldrin saw it knocked over by the rocket blast as he and Neil Armstrong left the moon 39 summers ago-And-.--Historian Anne Platoff) believes the first two (flags) from Apollo 11 and 12 did not survive the ignition gases of the lunar liftoff ...

Really So now with this information at hand PW,we can raise a very long debated question.
First-what kind of thrust and volume would we have from each rocket engine?. The lunar lander has to supply enough thrust to gently lower all the equipment and the two separate modules to the moons surface,and the lunar escape module has to lift it self and the two astronauts back into space-so a lot less weight,but at the same time we are raising a mass,in stead of lowering it. I think though,you would have to agree that the lunar lander rocket was producing more thrust,and ejecting a higher volume of mass.

So now the question that has been asked so many time's,and the answer we get to resolve the question at hand.The question being-->why is there no blast crater under the lander's rocket engine?
Quote:  it was throttled down to below 3,000 lbs as it neared the lunar surface-and in a vacuum exhaust gases expand rapidly once exiting the engine nozzle."
It is estimated that the particles that were ejected from under the lunar lander where traveling at speed's of over 1000 m/sec-or 3600KPH.

Lets say the answer is the reason no blast crater is formed under the lunar modules in any of the missions,but we will stick to apollo 11 and 12 for now.
We now have to ask the question-how was there enough thrust/force placed upon the flags from the escape modules rocket engine to knock over the flags,where that flag is a greater distance away from the rocket nozzle of the escape module,than the lunar surface was away from the lander nozzle at shut down,and yet no crater was produced by the landers engine?.
So only a very small amount of loose soil/dust was ejected away from the lunar lander,but the flag's that were firmly implanted into the ground were knocked over by the escape module's engine

So-i decide to agree with the fact that some of this very jagged and sharp edged soil/dust/small rocks are ejected from under the rocket engine,and this ejected mass is traveling at speeds in excess of 3600KPH. We have seen the ejected mass from !!NASA!! video's of the landings,so we know it happen's. This now raises another couple of questions. Below is 4 photographs supplied by NASA-along with the relevant reference numbers(just so as you can check for your self). The first is showing the distance of the flag from the lunar lander of Apollo 11. The second is of one of the foot pads of Apollo 11. The third is of the Apollo 12 mission,and once again shows the distance between the flag and lunar lander. The fourth is of one of the apollo 12 landers foot pad's.
So now we can see the difference in distance of the flags from the ascent module,and compare that with the distance between the landers rocket engine and lunar surface. One has to wonder how exactly the flags were knocked over by a smaller rocket engine that was a a greater distance away from the flags,than the rocket engine that was at a closer distance to loose soil/dust that left no crater at all.
We must also ask-->if material was being ejected from under the lunar landers rocket engine during landing,at speeds in excess of 3600KPH,then 1-why are the foot pads so spotlessly clean,and 2-why is there no damage what so ever to any part of those foot pad's and legs from this sharp/jagged ejecta that was impacting these parts of the lander at over 3600KPH?

I am sorry Tinman, but my respect for any intellectual prowess I may have credited you with in the past is dwindling rather quickly.  In fact, I am finding it hard to believe you were ever 27 years old.

Perhaps you can answer these questions PW.
Like i said--maybe rethink who is doing research here,and who is peddling a bias opinion only--just because of the need to believe.


Brad
P.S--on with the thermal issue next-->remember the material the flags are made of PW.
The flags that stood strong and proud throughout the days of every mission-in direct sun light.