Comments by "Randy Schissler" (@randyschissler5791) on "Today I Found Out"
channel.
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Don Pettit, whom you seem to be alluding to in your "we lost the technology," is not and never was a spokesman or authority for NASA. Yet, conspiracy theorists seize upon that one misconstrued and misinterpreted quote, as if it means something monumental, when it doesn't at all. In 1972, when Congress cut funding to NASA, the Apollo program was scrapped. That meant everything that went with it, contracts with contractors, infrastructure, equipment, engineers, support personnel, all of it. That's what Pettit meant with his poor choice of the word "technology." It was never about the technology needed to get humans through the Van Allen belts. With Apollo done, this gave NASA the opportunity to do less cost draining projects, and they did a lot over the decades. If they had kept going to the moon, they couldn't have done those things.
4
-
4
-
4
-
@wesleyA4962 "Even a NASA engineer saying we have to figure out how to protect our astronauts from radiation won't convince y'all. "
You're very confused. You are referring to NASA engineer Kelly Smith, in the 2014 video Orion: Trial by Fire. Kelly is talking about the new Orion spacecraft, passing through the Van Allen belts. He explains about the susceptibility of modern electronics to the effects of radiation. Modern microcircuits are very tiny and fragile, in comparison to the physically big electronics of Apollo. That's why the Apollo spacecraft didn't have a problem getting through the Van Allen belts. Notice how Kelly is talking about the radiation effects to the electronics, and not the humans on board. The danger is that if the electronics fail, then the spacecraft fails, and when the spacecraft fails, the astronauts die. But also notice when Kelly says that Orion has protection, shielding that will be put to the test, as the spacecraft cuts through the radiation, to make it home safely.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@TheOriginalNatBurner "why isn't there an unedited picture or video of the Earth in its entirety. "
That's totally false. Also, you are letting yourself get conned by the slimy huckster Bart Sibrel. Anyway, here is a partial list of some of the best photos of the earth. Not CGI, Photoshopped, or composite. All shot on celluloid film.
AS17-148-22725 to 22751, that's 26 photos.
AS08-14-2383 to 2394, that's 12 photos.
AS08-15-2535 to 2580, that's 46 photos.
AS08-16-2588 to 2609, that's 22 photos.
AS11-44-6668 to AS11-44-6696, that's 29 photos.
AS11-36-5293 to 5309, that's 17 photos.
AS11-36-5317 to 5381, that's 65 photos.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
That's interesting, because this is what Dr. James Van Allen has said about Apollo passing through the belts. You know, the same guy who discovered and studied the belts, that even bear his name?
"The radiation belts of the Earth do, indeed, pose important constraints on the safety of human space flight.
The very energetic (tens to hundreds of MeV) protons in the inner radiation belt are the most dangerous and most difficult to shield against. Specifically, prolonged flights (i.e., ones of many months’ duration) of humans or other animals in orbits about the Earth must be conducted at altitudes less than about 250 miles in order to avoid significant radiation exposure.
A person in the cabin of a space shuttle in a circular equatorial orbit in the most intense region of the inner radiation belt, at an altitude of about 1000 miles, would be subjected to a fatal dosage of radiation in about one week.
However, the outbound and inbound trajectories of the Apollo spacecraft cut through the outer portions of the inner belt and because of their high speed spent only about 15 minutes in traversing the region and less than 2 hours in traversing the much less penetrating radiation in the outer radiation belt. The resulting radiation exposure for the round trip was less than 1% of a fatal dosage – a very minor risk among the far greater other risks of such flights. I made such estimates in the early 1960s and so informed NASA engineers who were planning the Apollo flights. These estimates are still reliable.
The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense."
James A. Van Allen
4