So, who wants to win 1 million Euro?

[cjameshuff]

He doesn't know what the LES is?

And can't infer its purpose from its name.

[grmcdorman]

Indeed. What do we call an order of magnitude beyond not even wrong?

By the way, it occurred to me, based on his comments about stability during burns, that he may have the pencil-on-a-finger conception of rocket thrust - something that was proved wrong well before the German V2s, even.

[Bob B.]

I don't know; I've never considered the problem before.  If the moon's orbit were circular, I'd say it might be possible.

Mars' orbit is also highly elliptical. It's also somewhat out of the ecliptic.

The Aldrin cyclers have periods equal to integer multiples of the synodic period of Earth and Mars (about 2 years). He proposes two separate cyclers, one with a quick Earth-Mars transfer and another with a quick Mars-Earth transfer.

Mr. Aldrin has an advantage on me - he's got a PhD in orbital mechanics while I'm just an amateur who's read a few books and perused the Internet.  I can't do what he did.

[Bob B.]

Three minutes later the launch escape three motors system on top the CM was jettisoned ... one way or another. Why it was  fitted in the first place is not clear.

I never realized that the function of a launch escape system was so cryptic.

[ka9q]

I never realized that the function of a launch escape system was so cryptic.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he certainly doesn't deserve, perhaps he wonders why it's discarded after only 3 minutes when the launch continues for some time?

We know the reason, of course, is that the LES is needed only on the pad and during atmospheric flight when aerodynamic forces are extreme. Things can go to hell in a handbasket very, very quickly. So quickly that there may be no time for the commander to turn the celebrated abort handle. There's an automatic abort system called the Emergency Detection System (EDS).

Once they're out of the atmosphere, things become relatively laid back. Acceleration is much lower, and there's time to initiate an abort manually, if necessary, and it can be conducted with the existing propulsion systems in the CSM.

[Mag40]

I never realized that the function of a launch escape system was so cryptic.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt that he certainly doesn't deserve, perhaps he wonders why it's discarded after only 3 minutes when the launch continues for some time?

We know the reason, of course, is that the LES is needed only on the pad and during atmospheric flight when aerodynamic forces are extreme. Things can go to hell in a handbasket very, very quickly. So quickly that there may be no time for the commander to turn the celebrated abort handle. There's an automatic abort system called the Emergency Detection System (EDS).

Once they're out of the atmosphere, things become relatively laid back. Acceleration is much lower, and there's time to initiate an abort manually, if necessary, and it can be conducted with the existing propulsion systems in the CSM.

IIRC on Apollo 12, Pete Conrad was very close to engaging the LES after all hell broke loose with the lightning strikes, the question is, would it have actually worked

[AtomicDog]

Indeed. What do we call an order of magnitude beyond not even wrong?

By the way, it occurred to me, based on his comments about stability during burns, that he may have the pencil-on-a-finger conception of rocket thrust - something that was proved wrong well before the German V2s, even.

I keep reading HBs say that the lunar module was a fake because a rocket can't balance and land on a single engine,  then I watch the SpaceX grasshopper test:

And I laugh my head off.

[Chew]

Indeed. What do we call an order of magnitude beyond not even wrong?

By the way, it occurred to me, based on his comments about stability during burns, that he may have the pencil-on-a-finger conception of rocket thrust - something that was proved wrong well before the German V2s, even.

Are you referring to the pendulum rocket fallacy?

[dwight]

Three minutes later the launch escape three motors system on top the CM was jettisoned ... one way or another. Why it was  fitted in the first place is not clear.

I never realized that the function of a launch escape system was so cryptic.

I dont think Anders had a chat to Little Joe. I'm sure he would have cleared up LES for him immensely.

[sts60]

Björkman has changed his page again...

Three minutes later the launch escape three motors system on top the CM was jettisoned ... one way or another. Why it was  fitted in the first place is not clear.

*jaw drops* Why am I still surprised, after the RCS debacle... Heiwa, was it that hard to look up "launch abort system" on Wikipedia?

Actually, one wonders why the words "launch escape motors [sic] system" didn't provide some sort of clue.  Heiwa styles himself as this engineering genius, but not only are his research skills virtually nonexistent, he is unusually clue-resistant to even the most obvious information - as in when the words are actually staring him in the face.

ETA: I am reminded of another HB on BAUT who demanded where a certain picture was taken - apparently "Dryden Flight Research Center" in big letters across the bottom was too subtle.

[JayUtah]

It is not easy.

The only difficulty is in getting you to acknowledge your corrections openly.  You keep changing you site as a result of these discussion.  Clearly you admit you are in error.  You are just unwilling to admit to it openly because you have invested so much emotionally in the challenge.  This is what makes you a liar.

Say that your space ship has mass 32 676 kg excluding fuel and that you must slow down from 2 400 to 1 500 m/s velocity to insert into Moon orbit. Your space ship has a P-22 KS rocket engine with 97 400 N thrust (at full blast).

None of these "facts" has anything to do with Apollo.  You have been given the right facts but you disregard them.  You have been asked to prove your version of the facts is correct, but you refuse.

If you suggest, e.g. 10 898 kg, you must support your answer with proper calculations to win the prize (€1M).

This has been done for you many, many times.

I have a feeling you need >80 000 kg.

Great.  While you fumble around with your "feelings" based on wrong information and incompetent analysis, the rest of us will just keep building and flying spacecraft professionally.  Did it ever occur to you that sooner or later in your virtual internet travels you'd encounter real engineers who would be able to expose your fraud?

In order to proceed with the discussion, I suggest you try to clarify above basic questions of fuel consumption.

It has been clarified to you many times.  You have the wrong information to start with, and you do not know how to do the calculations properly.  Your expectation is based on misinformation and layman's ignorance, hence it is not a suitable standard against which to judge reality.

Pls do not suggest that I do not know anything about space travel...

It is not a suggestion.  It is an observation of fact.  Along with STS60, let me state it clearly:  You do not know anything about space travel.  Any line of reasoning that requires us to accept your claim to be an expert engineer is a non-starter.  I do not accept you as an expert in space operations, astrodynamics, rocketry, engineering, or in fact in basic high-school physics.

Just in case you missed it the second time:

You do not know anything about space travel.

that I am broke...

Again the same straw man.  You have simply been asked to prove that you a have a million euros and that you would be willing to award it.  You cannot or will not do that, hence no one believes your claim.  There is a difference between asking you to prove you are as wealthy as you say, and saying you are broke.

...because it is clear from link in post #1 what I am doing for a living. My biz is safety at sea. And I am quite good.

Your made-up company on a free web site?  Did you forget that we investigated the validity of your "agency" and found it to be bogus?  "Safety at sea" has nothing to do with anything you're trying to claim here, or in fact with the agglomeration of conspiracy theories you promote as part of your alleged business.

No, you do not get to point to a free web site you created to spread your nonsense and on that basis say that your minority opinion, supported only by wrong computations, makes you competent to dispute the validity of space travel.

[JayUtah]

I wonder will he (Heiwa) come back on here after he has had his a*se resoundably handed to him in quite such a manner.

"It's only a flesh wound."

Never underestimate the ability of someone who simply refuses to see reality.

[Andromeda]

[LunarOrbit]

Lol I'm going to have to remember customroadsign.com, it seems like a good way to get some of my moderator comments noticed.

[grmcdorman]

Indeed. What do we call an order of magnitude beyond not even wrong?

By the way, it occurred to me, based on his comments about stability during burns, that he may have the pencil-on-a-finger conception of rocket thrust - something that was proved wrong well before the German V2s, even.

Are you referring to the pendulum rocket fallacy?

Yes indeed.