why was the usa the only one to go to the moon?

[Jason Thompson]

Alex, give it up. Who do you think you are impressing here? Every post you make just adds to the image of you as a pointless, ignorant troll.

I repeat: what are your qualifications? What degree of precision is needed in determining the LM's position on the Moon? Where did Stanley Kubrick live and work at the time of Apollo?

If you are talking about 'the truth', as you so often insist, why do you have to resort to cheap jibes about grammar and such? Why do you refuse to answer questions?

[raven]

If I may make my guess, at this point he is trying to get banned.

[alexsanchez]

If I may make my guess, at this point he is trying to get banned.

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?  I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

[BazBear]

If I may make my guess, at this point he is trying to get banned.

I wouldn't doubt it, it seems to be a badge of honor in HB circles. Of course, they never admit that they were banned for their behavior, and not their beliefs.

[nomuse]

Sir, your errors far exceed even the most generous definition of pedantry.

Indeed; obvious troll is obvious.  He has no leg to stand upon for any of his on-topic material, so he stoops to critiquing spelling, grammar, and punctuation.  I'll bet in a few minutes he'll be complaining about the font.

I'm not feeding him the details of his latest error in photographic interpretation.  If I did that, he'd just wait a bit and then "confirm" my details through "his" investigation.  But I'm not giving him any clues -- just the proposition that his analysis is wrong.  Watch how he scrambles trying to guess what he has to do to discover it.  This is how you root out the charlatans, the ones who pump you for details that they can regurgitate later and pretend it was "their" analysis that found it.  They'll admit error, but only errors they "find" themselves and "correct."  It's anathema for this type to have to admit there's something they don't know.  Such fragile egos.  The kind that quibble over spelling.

Heh.  I'd never thought of hoax believer behavior on forums as analogous to Cold Reading...it does sorta fit.

Except that it is more like cold reading on a skeptic.  They keep getting what other audiences might applaud as "hits," and don't understand why the skeptic remains unimpressed.

[Chew]

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?

Your enthymeme fails. Only two reference sources are required to align an IMU. The references used while on the Moon were gravity and a celestial body.

I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

Do you know how IMUs are aligned on the Earth? Hint: it is not done how you previously stated. I operated inertia navigation systems for 20 years in the US Navy. Several times I have had to start up IMUs in the middle of the ocean after my sub lost all electrical power. The reference sources used for aligning them are gravity and true north. True north was provided by the ship's master gyrocompass, which automatically finds true north when started. The accuracy of the gyrocompass was verified by taking a bearing to a celestial body.

[Jason Thompson]

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?  I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

Since you're back on the subject, how about telling us exactly what degree of precision is needed in determining the LM's position in order to afect a successful liftoff and rendezvous. Have you managed to grasp that those two things were not one and the same process yet?

[nomuse]

It's that last that is hardest for our friend to understand.   He seems to have a one-chance, do-or-die, one ring to rule them all idea of how any of these alignments or maneuvers or, really, anything else can be performed.  The idea of a quorum, or even of error bars, seems totally alien to him.

And stuck in this idea that there has to be one gold standard perfect reference at the start of the process, he simply can not adapt to the idea that -- as Jay so well explained it many posts back -- rendezvous isn't designed that way.  It isn't ballistic.  You don't have to compute the final landing based upon the first position reckoning you made, ever.

[Chew]

It's that last that is hardest for our friend to understand.   He seems to have a one-chance, do-or-die, one ring to rule them all idea of how any of these alignments or maneuvers or, really, anything else can be performed.  The idea of a quorum, or even of error bars, seems totally alien to him.

And stuck in this idea that there has to be one gold standard perfect reference at the start of the process, he simply can not adapt to the idea that -- as Jay so well explained it many posts back -- rendezvous isn't designed that way.  It isn't ballistic.  You don't have to compute the final landing based upon the first position reckoning you made, ever.

Patrick went down that twisted line of reasoning at the JREF. He thought the LM's position on the surface had to be known within a gnat's ass or the LM would miss the CSM's docking cone! He was told over and over again that rendezvous and docking doesn't work that way until one poster at the JREF realized Patrick didn't know spacecraft have RCS! Can you imagine? To criticize LOR and not even know about RCS!

[alexsanchez]

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?  I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

Since you're back on the subject, how about telling us exactly what degree of precision is needed in determining the LM's position in order to afect a successful liftoff and rendezvous. Have you managed to grasp that those two things were not one and the same process yet?

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

[Glom]

Alex, do you know that the LM has RCS?

Tell us what RCS is so we can be assured your criticism isn't just because you don't know how it works.

[nomuse]

anybody figure out how to do a lunar rendezvous without an IMU alignment yet?  I'm looking into that.  I know that's a touchy subject.

Since you're back on the subject, how about telling us exactly what degree of precision is needed in determining the LM's position in order to afect a successful liftoff and rendezvous. Have you managed to grasp that those two things were not one and the same process yet?

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

Would you characterize a downrange error as being the most problematic for successful rendezvous?

[Zakalwe]

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

Forgive my ignorance (I'm not an engineer and talk of orbital mechanics leaves me feeling like a chimpanzee on hearing scientists talk about quantum physics), but isn't that a bit like saying that if I get my car an inch in the wrong place when I move off my driveway, then I'm going to miss my destination by a mile???

[Glom]

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

Forgive my ignorance (I'm not an engineer and talk of orbital mechanics leaves me feeling like a chimpanzee on hearing scientists talk about quantum physics), but isn't that a bit like saying that if I get my car an inch in the wrong place when I move off my driveway, then I'm going to miss my destination by a mile???

It would except for the fact you have a steering wheel.

And so did the LM of sorts.

[nomuse]

How about 3 decimal places in feet, since the CM is only 60 miles up?  If you're off by a hair, it turns into miles down range.  I've personally witnessed that when somebody gave me an equation with a wrong sign (+/-) that caused an error in the least significant bit of a calculation related to IMU alignment, which gets integrated (added repeatedly), and they almost aborted a launch in flight (that's when they blow it up.) I've got to talk to some people about this alignment issue. 

In the meantime, what year are we supposed to have another manned lunar mission?

Forgive my ignorance (I'm not an engineer and talk of orbital mechanics leaves me feeling like a chimpanzee on hearing scientists talk about quantum physics), but isn't that a bit like saying that if I get my car an inch in the wrong place when I move off my driveway, then I'm going to miss my destination by a mile???

Sort of.  He's assuming you can steer, all right, but you have to do it by dead reckoning.  That is; you get one long look around the driveway then you have to keep your eye closed for the rest of the trip.

To the extent that he recognizes IMU drift, it is to label it as more evidence that space travel is impossible.