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

[alexsanchez]

I am amazed that our resident former USAF engineer couldn't work that out. I blame the lack of finger puppets.

Why so testy?  Sounds like someone who knows they're on thin ice.  I must be striking a nerve.  The truth does not suffer investigation.

[nomuse]

I didn't say it couldn't land on the moon.  I just think the Soviet Union had a predilection for lying...

So, an uninformed appeal to ridicule, followed by a wish-washy half-retraction.

You said you worked space station guidance.  What exactly did you do?

uninformed = false premise
on ISS I took equations from a requirements document and coded them into Ada (using a HP Unix workstation and some drag and drop CASE program, called X-something).  Target code ran on an i386.

So what happened?  You use your entire brain to do your work, but to show that every one of your co-workers is either an idiot or a liar you don't need to actually think that hard?

Lemme ask you this.  If you are about to program in an unfamiliar environment, do you just assume you will get it right purely by instinct and accident, or do you actually ask for the development package?

I get it right by instinct.  The development package was crap and we had to correct errors in the generated code all the time.

I'd love to see you do that transporting code to a different embedded processor.  Especially when the registers and timer flags don't always match.

The thing is, when you are writing on metal, you don't get a compiler error and a chance to go back and fix it.  You get components in smoke.

[nomuse]

I am amazed that our resident former USAF engineer couldn't work that out. I blame the lack of finger puppets.

Why so testy?  Sounds like someone who knows they're on thin ice.  I must be striking a nerve.  The truth does not suffer investigation.

Better to say that engineers don't suffer fools.



And...amazing.  You really think your blundering, undirected flailing, with all the mistakes you've already aimed up to, turned up anything useful?  And you also think that this forum is filled with people who actually know the truth you are in hopes of wandering into one day, and are willingly posting despite the risk of giving away something they shouldn't?

[raven]

Why so testy?  Sounds like someone who knows they're on thin ice.  I must be striking a nerve.  The truth does not suffer investigation.

More like someone who is impatient with a wilful ignorant. I think the members of this bored have been more than considerate to your prattle.

[alexsanchez]

I didn't say it couldn't land on the moon.  I just think the Soviet Union had a predilection for lying...

So, an uninformed appeal to ridicule, followed by a wish-washy half-retraction.

You said you worked space station guidance.  What exactly did you do?

uninformed = false premise
on ISS I took equations from a requirements document and coded them into Ada (using a HP Unix workstation and some drag and drop CASE program, called X-something).  Target code ran on an i386.

So what happened?  You use your entire brain to do your work, but to show that every one of your co-workers is either an idiot or a liar you don't need to actually think that hard?

Lemme ask you this.  If you are about to program in an unfamiliar environment, do you just assume you will get it right purely by instinct and accident, or do you actually ask for the development package?

I get it right by instinct.  The development package was crap and we had to correct errors in the generated code all the time.

I'd love to see you do that transporting code to a different embedded processor.  Especially when the registers and timer flags don't always match.

The thing is, when you are writing on metal, you don't get a compiler error and a chance to go back and fix it.  You get components in smoke.

What do you mean "writing on metal?"  This was software.  Sounds like you think I don't know what I'm talking about, even though I did it.  If I want to transport code to a different processor, I recompile the source code for that target processor.

[JayUtah]

The possible changing of FOV is what makes me wonder.

And you haven't yet figured out your colossal error?

I haven't checked the pics in a graphic editor yet.

A graphic editor won't help.  The problem is in your brain.

Hard to say for sure just eyeballing it.

That was your problem before -- "just eyeballing."  Why haven't you corrected that?

[JayUtah]

Why so testy?  Sounds like someone who knows they're on thin ice.  I must be striking a nerve.  The truth does not suffer investigation.

Get over yourself.  You're cribbing from a 10-year-old long-debunked web site and pretending it's fresh new material that supports your political belief.  Plus the blatant lies you're telling about being any sort of competent engineer.

No, we don't suffer fools.  Your arrogance, dishonestly, and ineptness are what's provoking curt responses.

[alexsanchez]

Why so testy?  Sounds like someone who knows they're on thin ice.  I must be striking a nerve.  The truth does not suffer investigation.

More like someone who is impatient with a wilful ignorant. I think the members of this bored have been more than considerate to your prattle.

Wilful?  Prattle?  You must have gone to Oxford.  Wait a minute... ignorant is an adjective.  You can't use it like that in a sentence.  Bored [sic] is misspelled.  This is the kind of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put.

[cjameshuff]

What do you mean "writing on metal?"  This was software.  Sounds like you think I don't know what I'm talking about, even though I did it.  If I want to transport code to a different processor, I recompile the source code for that target processor.

I'm getting flashbacks to Jack White being questioned about his knowledge of the term "photogrammetry"...

[JayUtah]

Reduced to flames over grammar.  What was that about pedantry?

[raven]

Why so testy?  Sounds like someone who knows they're on thin ice.  I must be striking a nerve.  The truth does not suffer investigation.

More like someone who is impatient with a wilful ignorant. I think the members of this bored have been more than considerate to your prattle.

Wilful?  Prattle?  You must have gone to Oxford.  Wait a minute... ignorant is an adjective.  You can't use it like that in a sentence.  Bored [sic] is misspelled.  This is the kind of arrant pedantry up with which I will not put.

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

[Sus_pilot]

Did this Jules Verne steampunk looking thing actually land on the moon?
http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/news/uploads/LROCiotw/Lunokhod1.jpg

Why should the aesthetics of the vehicle affect its performance. (BTW, I think this looks seriously cool.)

If you think it couldn't land on the Moon, what specific parts of the design appear not to be suitable?

The Lunokhod always conjures up the short story "Callahan and the Wheelies" for me.

[JayUtah]

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.

[gillianren]

Alex, I promise you that you do not want to go down the "picking on grammar" road with me.

[alexsanchez]

Alex, I promise you that you do not want to go down the "picking on grammar" road with me.

bring it on.