Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Thomas Heger" wrote in message ... Am 18.10.2011 19:42, schrieb Scout: "Thomas Heger" wrote in message ... Am 18.10.2011 10:14, schrieb Scout: "Thomas Heger" wrote in message ... Am 17.10.2011 07:01, schrieb Scout: .. For Earth orbit you need much faster flight than you would need to stay in orbit around the moon, but nevertheless it is quite fast. On Earth it took a Saturn V rocket, to lift the craft into orbit. On the Moon it would take less fuel, but way more, than the few gallons, they had in the lander. Ok, let's see your math. I mean if you know they needed more, then clearly you have calculated all this out and know exactly how much they would need and whether they could have that much on the lander. So let's see your work. ---- Insert mathematical proof here. Here I will even aid you with the specifications for the mass, amount of fuel, type of fuel, specific impulse, thrust provided, available delta-V, and so on. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_...Specifications Well, I'm a little too lazy, but a rough calculation is possible: There is the Tsiolkovsky rocket equation velocity_final=v_exhaust* ln(mass_start/mass_finish) V_end= 2200 m/s * ln (4547 kg/(4547-2353) kg) that is : v_end approx. 1603 m/s this is an estimated calculation without gravity. the final velocity is reduced by delta v = g_moon * (time of engine running) Don't know that number (time_ engine) Maybe 100 seconds (???) makes: delta v = 1.6 m/s²*100 s=160 m/s What gives a rough estimate for the final velocity of the landers ascending stage of v_end = 1440 m/s. Now the orbital velocity had to be compared. But I don't have the data and actually I'm too lazy to find them out. But usual orbits should be a little less than escape velocity, what is v_orbit_escape = 2380 m/s. V_end is a rough estimate ('thumb times pi'). For better calculations someone with more experience in rocket science is needed. I cannot even tell you, if the ascent stage is fast enough or not. But my intuition tells me, it is not. IOW, you don't know what the hell you're talking about, and you're too lazy to do the work needed to find out if what you think actually has merit or is simply bat **** crazy. I haven't claimed to be a rocket scientist. I'm totally happy with an rough estimate. I could do it better, for sure, but do not want. What you have isn't even a rought estimate that applies. You simply threw some stuff up there, came up with some answers, but didn't use the data from the apollo program, which it should be noted I was even nice enough to lead you to by the hand, much less show that the results produced proved that a landing and take-off physically could not occur given those conditions. You simply flopped around trying to put together an argument. Free hint: If you're going to say someone else is lying, then you need to make sure you have your ducks in a row and can PROVE IT. All you've shown is that you are an empty headed conspiracy theorist, with lots of notions, but no facts, no proof, and from all evidence absolutely NO desire to find out what the facts really are. You are absolutely wrong! Then let's see your proof. Not some bull**** hack job you threw together, but conclusive factual objective mathematical PROOF..... Otherwise, I'm right. The rocket equation is a method to calculate the final velocity of a single staged rocket. The ascent stage would fit to 'rocket', even if doesn't look like. It had - of course - only one stage. The rocket equation ignores gravity. The moon has low gravity, what makes this equation even more usable. The precise orbit of the orbiter I could figure out, but that would be 'work', while typing stuff into the UseNet qualifies as 'leisure'. See what I mean.....no desire to find/figure out the actual facts. So I decided, I don't want to do that. IOW, screw figuring out the facts. This decision is absolutely my right Absolutely, you have every right to be as stupid and ignorant as you chose....but don't confuse that with being informed. and nobody could hold me responsible, because I refuse to calculate the orbit of the command module of Apollo 11. So basically, you've got a lot of hot air....but nothing to support it. Typical conspiracy theorist....long on talk, short on facts. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ESD Protection ? | Antenna | |||
ESD Protection ? | Antenna | |||
Protection Tip | Antenna | |||
And maybe Florida is different:# LIGHTNING PROTECTION SYSTEMS PROVIDE LIMITED PROTECTION. | Shortwave | |||
LIGHTNING PROTECTION | Shortwave |