Comments by "MRA" (@yassassin6425) on "Spark"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is hugely inaccurate. Yes, there were clearly design flaws with Mercury and most of the danger lay in a problem called dual authority control where it was possible for an astronaut to switch to fly-by-wire without turning off his manual system, drawing fuel from both tanks. During the the flight of Aurora 7, Carpenter didn’t realise his horizon scanner, the instrument that optically fed pitch attitude information to his onboard computer, was off by about 20 degrees - which he should have done. He also didn’t appreciate that in switching between fly-by-wire and manual control as prescribed by his flight plan he’d engaged dual authority control six times during his first orbit. Arguably not his fault. However, he wasn't concerned by the low fuel levels and despite a stream of advisories from Houston, which he ignored, he even covered the low fuel warning light with duct tape so it wouldn't distract him. He was so absorbed by changing the film in a camera for a last round of pictures and investigating the “fireflies” that had perplexed Glenn on his flight that he was late beginning his pre-retrofire checklist. It was at this point, when he needed to move quickly through vital steps, that he finally noticed the flaw with his horizon scanner. The automatic stabilisation system couldn’t maintain the 34-degree pitch and zero-degree yaw attitude he needed for reentry. Trouble shooting this new problem put him further behind, and when he engaged his fly-by-wire control mode, he forgot to switch off the manual system meaning for 10 minutes, both systems were burning fuel.
Although Aurora 7 aligned for retrofire, it consequently was a sub-optimal orientation and it was late meaning the capsule canted about 25 degrees to the right and the burn began three seconds late. And it was only after retrofire that Carpenter noticed both control systems were drawing fuel; at which point, the manual system was empty and the automatic system had just 10 percent left. Using fly-by-wire sparingly to keep the horizon in sight, Carpenter managed to hold Aurora 7’s attitude. The remaining fuel was consumed by the auxiliary damping mode that minimized oscillations as the spacecraft fell through the atmosphere...it was a very close call.
Chris Kraft vowed that Carpenter would never fly again - and he didn't. Although unquestionably a very talented electrical engineer and pilot. Max Faget who designed the Mercury capsule called Carpenter a better poet than astronaut. The Mercury capsule was a learning experience for all, but for all its flaws, there was a flight plan and Carpenter ' ' chose to disregard it. Witness the following 'Sigma 7' flight - (Carpenter's by then had become known as 'Stigma 7) - in which Wally Schirra performed to near perfection. Ironically he was also later 'grounded' due to his objection to the excessively detailed flight plan and work load placed on Apollo 7.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@kalleklovvn9262
"Yes, it is"
Right - so that 321 foot 70 ton rocket sitting on launch pad 38a at Cape Canaveral primed for launch this month - is a hoax? ...simply because it is contrary to your claim that "we don't have the technology right now." Ok genius. Nothing gets past you.
"Science has become a religion designed for the tax cattle. Its our belief and it has endless integrity so we will follow it and believe it."
And yet here you are using a device that lets you instantly share this moronic claim with people all over the world. You live in a world that has been shaped by the effectiveness of the scientific method.
Known science is not a 'religion' - religion implies 'belief' and science is not about that.
Known science is governed by physical laws and mathematical axioms and so these need to be established and discovered. Having done so these are by nature irrefutable and ineluctable.
Science is open to all. When you boil a kettle or stir sugar in your tea, what happens? That's science. Are you denying that? When you switch on your laptop...it's science. How can that be a "religion"? Science is always open to questioning and falsification - religion is not.
In the absence of education and understanding, it's a lot easier to hide behind a conspiracy theory than it is to learn the mathematics and applied science involved. Your opinion is worthless.
That's because you have no understanding of those disciplines - rocketry, aerospace and propulsion engineering, astrophysics - specialist fields that support the validity of the Apollo Programme.
The reason you've chosen that conclusion is because you like to imagine that you are among the few people who are smart enough to see through a huge secret that has fooled the vast masses of your "inferiors". Through sheer gullibility and a large helping of illusory superiority, you get off on deluding yourself that you're one of the small minority too clever to be fooled. But you can't even demonstrate this supposed intellectual prowess when challenged to do so, which make it transparently obvious that your claims amount to nothing more than empty ego masturbation and resentment of qualities such as accomplishment, achievement, knowledge and expertise that has eluded you throughout your life. Precisely why, the engineers responsible for Project Artemis have dedicated their lives to their respective specialisms whilst you waste yours mindlessly trolling comments sections and gorging on junk conspiracy videos.
You people brand yourself 'truthers' yet remain abject strangers to the 'truth'. In fact, in the post-truth era that we inhabit that has enabled such ignorance to thrive within your internet bubble and social media, nothing could be more diametrically the opposite than the believer and perpetrator in online conspiracy theory.
That's not just a 'religion', it's a cult.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Actually, during reentry and splashdown of the Apollo-Soyuz mission, the crew of the CM were accidentally exposed to toxic hydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide fumes, caused by unignited reaction control system (RCS) hypergolic propellants venting from the spacecraft and reentering a cabin air intake. The RCS was inadvertently left on during descent due to an error by Vance Brand, and the toxic fumes were sucked into the spacecraft as it drew in outside air. Brand briefly lost consciousness, while Stafford retrieved emergency oxygen masks, put one on Brand, and gave one to Slayton. The three astronauts were hospitalized for two weeks in Honolulu.
Toxic monomethyl hydrazine fuel from the plumbing in one of the space shuttle's orbital maneuvering system pods or APUs was quite common. During STS-9, two of the three APUs caught fire in the APU compartment in the rear of the Shuttle. The APUs provide hydraulic pressure to operate the orbiter’s flight controls and landing gear. Unaware of the fire, John Young landed the orbiter without difficulty. The fire continued after the wheels stopped, eventually burning itself out, causing major damage to the compartment. The fact that there had been a fire was not discovered, however, until the APU compartment was opened during post-flight inspections.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1