Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
General Discussion / Re: Is it time to admit defeat?
« Last post by Zakalwe on November 08, 2024, 02:46:31 AM »
When the ship is sinking in a gale-force wind and when the seas are high we need more, not fewer, lifeboats. America has voted for insanity and the next decade is going to be very very rough for those who aren't white multi-millionaires.

This place is a lifeboat. Please don't sink it.
12
The Hoax Theory / Re: Apollo Guidance Computers
« Last post by JayUtah on November 07, 2024, 06:58:23 PM »
I think it's important to understand that the notion of substantially altering the inherent behavior of a flying machine by tweaking its software was a relatively new concept at the time. Eldon Hall's books describe how computing devices were used in missiles and spacecraft before, but the AGC was a quantum leap in flexibility and functionality.
13
General Discussion / Re: Is it time to admit defeat?
« Last post by JayUtah on November 07, 2024, 06:49:27 PM »
I guess I'm just feeling like we can't compete with the armies of disinformation peddlers that exist now. People are so brainwashed to distrust experts that nothing we tell them is getting through to them.

We'll always be able to compete. Not always win, but there's intellectual and moral value to making the right answers available. I have several friends that I've known since they were in law school and who are now public defenders. They win very few cases—almost none. But they get better outcomes for their clients than those people would get on their own. It's still demoralizing to see fact and reason play smaller and smaller roles in society. But things still have value for being provably right.

I started clavius.org not with the ideal of making the conspiracy theories go away, but to simply provide the other side of the story. Having actual people say they changed their minds because of my effort is just icing on the cake.
14
The Hoax Theory / Re: Apollo Guidance Computers
« Last post by bknight on November 07, 2024, 04:47:24 PM »
Thanks for letting me know that there was a small issue that was fixed with a bit of minor coding.  Derek wouldn't be pleased buy oh well sad for him and his delusion.
15
The Hoax Theory / Re: Apollo Guidance Computers
« Last post by JayUtah on November 07, 2024, 04:18:09 PM »
I still use "Tindallgrams" as prime examples of how to write in a technical context so that your communication is clear, accurate, and jargon-minimal.

As I wrote above, P64 originally transitioned to P65 when it reached a prescribed altitude. P65 is an automatic descent program: it nulled the lateral motion rates and lowered the LM straight down to the surface by managing the throttle to match preprogrammed height and descent-rate criteria. But the crews generally used P66, which is misleadingly described as "manual control."

In P66, the PGNS mode is switched to ATT HOLD mode. This means the hand controller dictates the LM attitude. You move the hand controller as usual, and you let it go back to the center detent when the LM is in the attitude you want, which may be pitched forward, backward, or to either side. Obviously this means the DPS is giving you horizontal acceleration as well as controlling the descent. Armstrong basically pitched Eagle foward considerably in order to speed past the boulder field. When the controller enters detent, the DAP automatically nulls any rotation rates and then holds the LM in that commanded attitude until told differently.

Incidentally this is why you hear Armstrong say, "ACA out of detent." A consequence of landing on the surface in ATT HOLD mode is that the surface orientation may not be the commanded LM attitude. As the landing gear settles and the ship lands, the DAP will fire the RCS jets furiously trying to put the LM back in the commanded attitude, only to fail because the ship can't rotate while landed. The immediate solution is just to wiggle the controller out of detent and let it snap back. The DAP then accepts the landed attitude as the commanded attitude. The permanent solution is Aldrin's indication, "Four-thirteen is in." Erasable memory location 0413 in the AGC is the "We have landed" variable. If the DAP sees anything non-zero in that memory location, it doesn't do anything autopiloty. The pilot manually sets that to non-zero on the DSKY to confirm to the computer that the ship is on the ground.

What happened on Apollo 12 is that when the crew switched into P66, they started veering to the right. Not much at first, but the LM had just enough right roll in the commanded attitude to build up quite a bit of ground-track error. By the time Pete Conrad noticed it, he had to steer sharply to the left to return to the nominal landing track. Imagine your teenager pulling into the garage for the first time and paying so much attention to one side of the car that he nearly shears off the wing mirror on the other side—he'll wrench the wheel sharply in the other direction once he notices.

The concern was that there was too much mental workload in P66. The pilot had to manage horizontal rates in two dimensions as well as descent rate, all while keeping an eye on the intended landing site. This is why Armstrong had Aldrin watching those figures and calling them out when they were important. Armstrong didn't want his attention shifting from cockpit to window and back. And that's a legitimate concern: it's why we have heads-up displays where possible.

The analysis between NASA and MIT was that some of the functions of P65 needed to be duplicated in P66: notably the code to null out the lateral rates. This was then tied to the PGNS mode selector so that ATT HOLD would continue to behave as before, but AUTO would engage the automatic lateral control. Then there were a few refinements to prevent this new mode from doing stupid stuff like lurching violently in order to null high lateral rates, and cutting out at a certain low altitude when the radar data would get noisy and cause misbehavior.

The final change was to have P64 transition to P66 instead of P65.

This whole episode is a great example of how things look at first clean and elegant on paper—separating mostly-automatic and mostly-manual modes—but then become appropriately baroque as the initial operators say, "Hey, now that I think about it..." I always quip that there are two stages to every design: (1) too early to tell, and (2) too late to do anything about it.
16
General Discussion / Re: Is it time to admit defeat?
« Last post by Peter B on November 07, 2024, 03:36:48 PM »
Personally, I've been tossing around the idea of starting a blog to discuss a range of issues from a skeptical point of view. Over the last day I've swung more strongly towards the idea of doing it.

You absolutely should. I used to blog before Facebook/Twitter came along and "killed" blogs... but I they're making a comeback. They're good for organizing your thoughts.

Thanks for the endorsement!

But I'd just like to mention the reasons I promote Ecosia and Lids4Kids in my sig block:

- I like Ecosia for the idea that people can make a change for the better simply by changing the search engine they use; and

- Lids4Kids is a grass-roots community organisation which provides (a) a simple process for both households and businesses to reduce the waste of small plastic products which are hard to recycle at the individual level but easily recycled in mass, and (b) an easily scalable process any community can set up and expand.

If we can't rely on governments to lead action against climate change, then it's going to have to be led by individuals and communities. Action is a good antidote for despair, and I'd like to think that at least some people who see these organisations mentioned will be motivated to change their behaviours and/or start similar organisations in their communities, and promote them to others.
17
General Discussion / Re: Is it time to admit defeat?
« Last post by LunarOrbit on November 07, 2024, 03:22:26 PM »
LO, I'm not leaving either.  This site has been the best resource for Apollo, and I have learned a bunch of information concerning my favorite space operations.

Thanks, BK.

I do believe we are the best resource for anyone with questions about the Apollo hoax theory or the history of the space program in general. I guess I'm just feeling like we can't compete with the armies of disinformation peddlers that exist now. People are so brainwashed to distrust experts that nothing we tell them is getting through to them.

And to be clear, I'm not suggesting that it's our fault or that it's up to us to save the world. We're just a small group of fire fighters with garden hoses in the middle of a raging global forest fire. But I wish I could believe that people will snap out of whatever spell they're under before it's too late.
18
General Discussion / Re: Is it time to admit defeat?
« Last post by bknight on November 07, 2024, 12:43:40 PM »
LO, I'm not leaving either.  This site has been the best resource for Apollo, and I have learned a bunch of information concerning my favorite space operations.
19
The Hoax Theory / Re: Apollo Guidance Computers
« Last post by bknight on November 07, 2024, 12:02:17 PM »
I remember a conversation with a Derek concerning the early Apollo flights didn't happen but later ones did.  His source was John.  John's position was that the AGC was not "capable of the work to get to the Lunar surface.  I challenged Derek that the AGC never had any hardware/major software changes from the early flights to the later ones.  While searching for a strong rebuttal I happened across "Tindallgrams" a series of software changes made by Howard W. “Bill” Tindall, Jr. working at MIT, link at the end of this post.
During reading of the large amount of his posts I came across a comment by Bill I'm not going to read through all of them, but there was a change made in the software prior to A13 to "prevent the problems associated during the A12 landing, IIRC.  What I'll ask the group mainly directed at Jay with all his knowledge, but I don't remember reading any issues that occurred during the landing operations of A12.  Does anyone have memory of a issues during the landing phase of A12 that was addressed with software changes?  From the reading, again IIRC, the software was change to null out lateral movements of the LM.
It may have been "70-PA-T-1A"

https://rdmond.org/Tindallgrams/

20
General Discussion / Re: Is it time to admit defeat?
« Last post by LunarOrbit on November 06, 2024, 10:22:06 PM »
Sorry, guys. It must be like living in the apartment upstairs from a meth lab.

A little bit... ;D

Now many of my fellow Canadians are saying "We should be a meth lab too!"

Quote
I'm not going anywhere.

I'm glad to hear that, Jay. It wouldn't be the same without you.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10