Radiation

[timfinch]

For all of you that believe the Apollo craft followed some obscure path to avoid the highest radiation area I extend a challenge to you.  Show the data.  Show the course change and provide the corroborating tracking data.  If not the settle in and accept the same path the Orion EFT took for I can provide the data and the corroboration.

[timfinch]

everything is a straight line in 2d.

Even a curve on a log graph? 

Perspective is king.  Look at it from it's side view.

[bknight]

Back to subject matter at hand.  Can we all agree the Orion EFT's path into the VAB mirrored the Apollo's?

No they don't mirror one another.  That statement is incorrect and will be challenged every time you attempt it.

[timfinch]

Back to subject matter at hand.  Can we all agree the Orion EFT's path into the VAB mirrored the Apollo's?

No they don't mirror one another.  That statement is incorrect and will be challenged every time you attempt it.

Do they share inclinations?

[bknight]

For all of you that believe the Apollo craft folled some obscure path to avoid the highest radiation area I extend a challenge to you.  Show the data.  Show the course change and provide the corroborating tracking data.  If not the settle in and accept the same path the Orion EFT took for I can provide the data and the corroboration.

You have repeatedly shown the path that Apollo took and hand waved it away, you were linked both the TLI and radiation work that Bob B did and stated they were wrong and he was a NASA shill.  But you carefully avoided showing any other work that refuted Bob's or was in agreement with yours.  Why is that?  Could it be that you are the one that is incorrect in both your radiation assumption along with your assumption of the trajectory that Apollo generally took through the VARB?

[bknight]

Back to subject matter at hand.  Can we all agree the Orion EFT's path into the VAB mirrored the Apollo's?

No they don't mirror one another.  That statement is incorrect and will be challenged every time you attempt it.

Do they share inclinations?

I have stated to you that they have similar inclinations in LEO, but at the time of ignition of the SIV-B that similarity ends.

[timfinch]

For all of you that believe the Apollo craft folled some obscure path to avoid the highest radiation area I extend a challenge to you.  Show the data.  Show the course change and provide the corroborating tracking data.  If not the settle in and accept the same path the Orion EFT took for I can provide the data and the corroboration.

You have repeatedly shown the path that Apollo took and hand waved it away, you were linked both the TLI and radiation work that Bob B did and stated they were wrong and he was a NASA shill.  But you carefully avoided showing any other work that refuted Bob's or was in agreement with yours.  Why is that?  Could it be that you are the one that is incorrect in both your radiation assumption along with your assumption of the trajectory that Apollo generally took through the VARB?

Here is my work.  What part of it confuses you  or provides you with reason to doubt it?  It is simple, succinct and irrefutable.

[timfinch]

Back to subject matter at hand.  Can we all agree the Orion EFT's path into the VAB mirrored the Apollo's?

No they don't mirror one another.  That statement is incorrect and will be challenged every time you attempt it.

Do they share inclinations?

I have stated to you that they have similar inclinations in LEO, but at the time of ignition of the SIV-B that similarity ends.

so you contend they changed inclinations when that rocket fired?

[timfinch]

I would love if anyone of you could explain why NASA's test of the orion was on an identical inclination of the apollo trajectories and why it required greater shielding for future lunar missions if the apollo shielding was so effective in transiting the VAB and lunar operations.  Why fix that which is not broken?  How does that work in your mind.  Apollo ventured out in solar maximum and received a piddling of an exposure.  What was not to love about that?

[timfinch]

I am on facebook.  If any of you would like a one on one without the incessant and annoying chatter of Abaddon then send me a friend request and we can explore the depths of this subject sans the peanut gallery.

[Allan F]

I would love if anyone of you could explain why NASA's test of the orion was on an identical inclination of the apollo trajectories and why it required greater shielding for future lunar missions if the apollo shielding was so effective in transiting the VAB and lunar operations.  Why fix that which is not broken?  How does that work in your mind.  Apollo ventured out in solar maximum and received a piddling of an exposure.  What was not to love about that?

Because Orions mission is NOT a short hop to the moon and back. It is designed to go further and longer than ever before. Therefore it will encounter a greater accumulated dosis of radiation and therefore it needs to be tested in a hostile radiation environment. To ensure the electronics will keep working and not fail.

[raven]

From what I've read, modern electronics are also more susceptible to radiation damage in comparison to Apollo's hardware. If I am wrong on this, I, of course, welcome any correction.

[Allan F]

Much more vulnerable. The logic gates have a size of a few nanometers - where the Apollo era equipment used logic gates around (IIRC) a few tenths of milimeters. A charged particle hitting those old gates wasn't very likely to do any damage. Modern gates might even be flipped to another state by such an event. Or perhaps even disabled.

[timfinch]

I would love if anyone of you could explain why NASA's test of the orion was on an identical inclination of the apollo trajectories and why it required greater shielding for future lunar missions if the apollo shielding was so effective in transiting the VAB and lunar operations.  Why fix that which is not broken?  How does that work in your mind.  Apollo ventured out in solar maximum and received a piddling of an exposure.  What was not to love about that?

Because Orions mission is NOT a short hop to the moon and back. It is designed to go further and longer than ever before. Therefore it will encounter a greater accumulated dosis of radiation and therefore it needs to be tested in a hostile radiation environment. To ensure the electronics will keep working and not fail.

It would seem that Apollo proved the VAB was not even a consideration realizing the transit and lunar mission was conducted at less than .24 mgy/day.  The only obstacle to deep space exploration should be long term GCR exposure and SPE's.  Both requiring hydrogenous shielding or new age technologies.

[Allan F]

Aaaaaannnnd we're back to your initial statement - the misread graph.