The sickest video of returning from space ever

Tl;dr

Tl;dr

More like

Too intelligent; couldn't understand.

Quote from: hoppy on June 26, 2016, 06:57:22 PM

Tl;dr

More like

Too intelligent; couldn't understand.

And more like sheer bull shit...

Whatever Papa says, the Delta Rockets went up, Saturn Rockets went up, the Ariane Rockets went up and the Space-X Rockets went up stabilised without aerodynamic fins!

So your SCHPAYZE ROCCKKIT ENJUNEARS are going to just put these fins on the fuselage of the Saturn for no purpose...

No, no, no...cannot have it both ways, there Clicksley...You wrote the word, "WITHOUT!" The Saturn rocket is not, "WITHOUT!" Just admit you have no effin clue!!!

Yes, I admit I did not get the plane type right (big difference between 757 and 767) and the fuel was split over two buildings.

And then you want to think the difference between a 757 and a 767 is going to allow you upwards of DOUBLE the fuel capacity? Are you INSANE!?!?! Just ADMIT you have no clue!!!

Just admit you are a shill who stinks at the job!!!

So sorry, I didn't put my specs on and I missed those tiny things on the bottom! And I can't read yet, just look at the pretty pictures of stuck gauges and thingos!

I knew you lot were kinky but actually getting photos of each other with anally secreted gauges...wow, just wow...

Quote from: sokarul on June 26, 2016, 07:13:54 PM

Quote from: hoppy on June 26, 2016, 06:57:22 PM

Tl;dr

More like
Too intelligent; couldn't understand.

And more like sheer bull shit...

Quote from: rabinoz on June 26, 2016, 04:29:22 PM

Whatever Papa says, the Delta Rockets went up, Saturn Rockets went up, the Ariane Rockets went up and the Space-X Rockets went up stabilised without aerodynamic fins!

Quote from: totallackey

So your SCHPAYZE ROCCKKIT ENJUNEARS are going to just put these fins on the fuselage of the Saturn for no purpose...

Quote from: Henry Spencer

Large rockets are controlled and steered by altering the direction of their engine thrust, usually (although not always) by swivelling the engines themselves.

Comment: If nothing is done, the rocket would fall like a simple pencil on my finger.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Fins on a large rocket are seldom big enough to change this overall picture.
When a large rocket has fins at all, typically they are there to help the control system a little bit in the worst part of the stratosphere.  In some cases, like the Saturn V, the fins are no help at all during normal ascent,
but they slow down the loss of control in certain emergency situations, and give escape systems more time to react.

from Rocket Steering

And who cannot read? Look at

In some cases, like the Saturn V, the fins are no help at all during normal ascent, but they slow down the loss of control in certain emergency situations, and give escape systems more time to react.

In "the Saturn V, the fins are no help at all during normal ascent", so the ascent was made without any assistance of the fins, whose sole purpose is to "give escape systems more time to react". Sorry if you cannot undertand that!

No, no, no...cannot have it both ways, there Clicksley...You wrote the word, "WITHOUT!" The Saturn rocket is not, "WITHOUT!" Just admit you have no effin clue!!!

Yes, I can have it TWO ways! The Saturn V has small fins, but they make the ascent "WITHOUT" the assistance of the fins!

The Saturn went up stabilised WITHOUT the assistance aerodynamic fins! The "aerodynamic fins" played no part in the normal ascent. Do I need to say it more.

Get over it! Large rockets do not rely on "aerodynamic stability", and "Most large rockets, in fact, become unstable as speed increases.  The control system typically works hardest in the stratosphere, where the rocket is at high speed in air that is still fairly thick, and where winds are often strong.  They go back to being neutrally stable as the air thins out and aerodynamic forces become insignificant."

Whatever the details of wording and whatever your take on the semantics of it, the situation is clear - large space-rockets do not rely on aerodynamic stability! Surely even you (and Papa) can see that when the rocket has no vertical velocity there simply can be no aerodynamic stability.
See this V2 "hovering", relying on dynamic stability alone, via its gyros:
And before you jump in, the V2 did have steering aerodynamic fins, but of course these had no effect if the with no forward velocity!

Not that you will bother!

STUPID BULLSHIT BLATHERING ABOUT GETTING CAUGHT AND CALLED OUT AS AN IGNORANT SHILL!!!

Not that you will bother!

Now stop wasting time with stupid nit-picking.

Not nitpicking...

1) Saturn V = HAS FINS; or,
2) Saturn V = HAS NO FINS.

Your first post was very CLEAR! You stated Option 2. You were as fucking wrong about that as you are the rest of your alts' BS...

Go back and take a good swig, Geoff...That is the only comfort you have left... (except for that gauge pocketed in your rectum...)

Quote from: rabinoz on June 27, 2016, 06:03:37 AM

STUPID BULLSHIT BLATHERING ABOUT GETTING CAUGHT AND CALLED OUT AS AN IGNORANT SHILL!!!

Not that you will bother!

Now stop wasting time with stupid nit-picking.

Not nitpicking...

1) Saturn V = HAS FINS; or,
2) Saturn V = HAS NO FINS; or,
3) Saturn V = HAS FINS THAT DON'T DO MUCH OF ANYTHING.

Your first post was very CLEAR! You stated Option 2. You were as fucking wrong about that as you are the rest of your alts' BS...

Go back and take a good swig, Geoff...That is the only comfort you have left... (except for that gauge pocketed in your rectum...)

You forgot option 3.

An arrow has, what, for stability?

Large rockets do not rely on "aerodynamic stability"

lol.

Larjj rokkitz iz majik dey got harri pottur broomstik spellz goin on n shit...

An arrow has, what, for stability?

A good deal of speed by the time it leaves the bow.

Even spears can be fairly stable.

How big are the stabilizing fins on a bullet?

Quote from: sceptimatic on June 27, 2016, 11:14:28 AM

An arrow has, what, for stability?

A good deal of speed by the time it leaves the bow.

Even spears can be fairly stable.

How big are the stabilizing fins on a bullet?

Total bullshit from the time-wasting sock-master as usual.

Why aren't you perma-banned?

Really, I want to know; why aren't you banned?

Anyhoo; spears will only be truly stable throughout their trajectory if the COG is ahead of the COP; same as a rocket.

And bullets are spin-stabilised, which is why unrifled guns use ball projectiles.

Most real artillery rockets are also spin-stabilised; those that are not have large stabilising fins, usually both fore-&-aft.

These are all basic ballistic principles, all of which teh harri pottur majik broomstik shpayze-rokkitz violate.

Summary: LOL, STFU & GTFO...

Shill.

Anyhoo; spears will only be truly stable throughout their trajectory if the COG is ahead of the COP; same as a rocket.

And bullets are spin-stabilised, which is why unrifled guns use ball projectiles.

Most real artillery rockets are also spin-stabilised; those that are not have large stabilising fins, usually both fore-&-aft.

So there are stabilization methods other than fins?

Good to know.

So you're John Davis?

We all knew that anyway.

Ever seen a shpayze-rokkit spin it's way up to shpayze, massively obvious sock-master shill?

No, you have fucking not.

Dickhead.

Hey - this 'ignore papa Legba monday' is working out real well for you fucking shills ain't it?

lol.

Ever seen a shpayze-rokkit spin it's way up to shpayze, massively obvious sock-master shill?

So it's either fins or spinning?

Are you sure that there aren't any other methods of stabilization?

Why don't you tell us about em, John?

I wonder if any of em will be things that ain't already been shot down in this thread?

You know; so you can just start again & pretend it didn't happen?

Which you do all the fucking time?

And never get either warned or banned for?

Because you run the forum?

Off you go, John...

Why don't you tell us about em, John?

Nah, I'll just let you think about it for a while.

Maybe you should ask some of your dark web aerospace engineer buddies how aerodynamically unstable fighter jets keep from crashing.

Yeah, thought so.

Already been done, on this thread.

So predictable...

And un-bannable...

Aren't you, John?

Quote from: rabinoz on June 27, 2016, 06:03:37 AM

Not that you will bother!

Now stop wasting time with stupid nit-picking.

Not nitpicking...
1) Saturn V = HAS FINS; or,
2) Saturn V = HAS NO FINS; or
<< you left on out >>
3) Saturn V = HAS VERY SMALL FINS THAT HAVE NO EFFECT DURING NORMAL ASCENT;
<< fixed >>

The important point is still that large space-rockets ( they do get up your nose don't they  ) do not rely on fins or aerodynamic stability during normal ascent!

In case you missed it:
The Saturn went up stabilised WITHOUT the assistance aerodynamic fins! The "aerodynamic fins" played no part in the normal ascent. Do I need to say it more.

Get over it! Large rockets do not rely on "aerodynamic stability", and "Most large rockets, in fact, become unstable as speed increases.  The control system typically works hardest in the stratosphere, where the rocket is at high speed in air that is still fairly thick, and where winds are often strong.  They go back to being neutrally stable as the air thins out and aerodynamic forces become insignificant."

Surely even you (and your partner in crime) can see that when the rocket has no vertical velocity there simply can be no aerodynamic stability.
See this V2 "hovering", relying on dynamic stability alone, via its gyros:
And before you jump in, the V2 did have steering aerodynamic fins, but of course these had no effect if the with no forward velocity!

Whatever the totallackey and the puppy say, the Delta Rockets went up, Saturn Rockets went up, the Ariane Rockets went up and the Space-X Rockets went up without relying on aerodynamic fins for stability!   << fixed it >>

Let's have a look at your giant trash-penis 'Delta Heavy IV', shall we?



LOL!!!

Thunderbirds are go!

The animators couldn't even decide if it was a cloudy day or not...

As for your managing to find a couple of seconds of super-slo-mo film of a V2 'hovering'; whoopy-doo.

Cos teh silly fake Saturn V was allegedly 214 times heavier than the V2; so please show me the gyros in teh Saturn V that were correspondingly larger...

Cos teh silly fake Saturn V was allegedly 214 times heavier than the V2; so please show me the gyros in teh Saturn V that were correspondingly larger...

Since you are answering in lieu of TotalIdiot (oops Lickey, Lickey, Lackey or something) I had better answer it so he'll realise what an idiotic answer you gave in his place!

Surely even you would know that the size of the gyros bears absolutely no relation to the size of the rocket.
Ever heard of "servo control systems" as they called them in the old days (where you seem to be living). If you bothered to watch the early part of the "hovering V2" it would have been carefully explained to you, but admittedly the words were more than one syllable long!

The gyros in the V2 did not drive the carbon steering vanes in the exhaust stream directly; they are driven by a servo-motor (heard of them ?) controlled by a pot (short for potentiometer!) moved by the gyros.

Of course the Saturn V would use an electronic control system, but you can study it yourself in: SATURN V MANUAL BACKUP GUIDANCE AND CONTROL, PILOTED SIMULATION STUDY
It's only a "simulation study", but near enough - you can't read anyway.

This is only a diagram of the instrumentation unit for a Saturn V, so it doesn't show the physical size:
You can read all about how it works in your favourite reference source Wikipedia!Of course that instrumentation unit does a bit more than just launch attitude control, so it's pretty big! (not that the gyros themselves are that large, they only stabilise the gimbal mounted platform):
From: Apollo 11 Image Gallery Preparing A Moonship .

There, all this stuff is from your favourite sources: Wikipedia AND NASA, Wow, now you should be happy!

Just a curious question papa....would it not be strange if markjo and John Davis were the same?? As believes the earth is flat and space does not exist, the other, earth is a sphere and space does exist.

What would be the point in arguing with ones self?? Especially when the different "people" have conflicting world views? I am unaware of the benefit of this, or the end game goal. Unless you are suggesting he is a severe DID victim?

What is strange about the idea of Controlled Opposition, Limited Hangouts & False Dialectics?

All are ancient spook-tricks; read Sun Tzu & Machiavelli if you are confused on the matter.

Enough of your nonsense; I'd like to know why the smoke cloud beneath the V2 in the youtube rabinoz posted does not move at all?

Watch from 2:16:



Could rabinoz be posting yet more fake bullshit?

Lol yes he could...

He is also still replying to my posts even though he claims to have me blocked...

Clearly there is no end to his Lies.

Toodle-pip, Losers!

What is strange about the idea of Controlled Opposition, Limited Hangouts & False Dialectics?

All are ancient spook-tricks; read Sun Tzu & Machiavelli if you are confused on the matter.

I am familiar with the art of war, not so much the other. Do you find this tactic a feasibility in such an obscure forum? I could understand such a thing in a place with mainstream appeal and pull.

Why send an entire troop to a village that only has one pistol?? You watch them, and if they become an actual threat then deal with it. Until then, why waste the resources?

Enough of your nonsense;

Oh well, I knew the brief moment of pleasant exchange and actual communication on the 9/11 thread would not last long. It was pleasant despite its extremely brief stay.

Why send an entire troop to a village that only has one pistol?

There is not 'an entire troop' here.

There are at most 6 operatives to cover a 24-hour period, who are also shilling other sites as well. They're all over youtube, for example.

Now back to this...

Watch from 2:16:



The lack of movement in the smoke cloud beneath the V2 shows 1 of 2 possibilities:

1: The film is ultra-slow motion footage of a normal take-off

2: The footage is fake.

Note that neither possibility permits it being footage of a 'hovering' V2, as Geoff claimed.

Ergo, Geoff is busted as a lying shill.

Again.

lol.

Also looks like few frames missing as lands..

It's just reversed footage of a rocket taking off.

Need a video of it taking off and then landing.

Quote from: Babyhighspeed on June 28, 2016, 01:03:09 AM

Why send an entire troop to a village that only has one pistol?

There is not 'an entire troop' here.

There are at most 6 operatives to cover a 24-hour period, who are also shilling other sites as well. They're all over youtube, for example.

Now back to this...

Watch from 2:16:



The lack of movement in the smoke cloud beneath the V2 shows 1 of 2 possibilities:

1: The film is ultra-slow motion footage of a normal take-off

2: The footage is fake.

Note that neither possibility permits it being footage of a 'hovering' V2, as Geoff claimed.

Ergo, Geoff is busted as a lying shill.

Again.

lol.

^Thinks he's a rocket scientist.
"Atoms don't exist."

You are just a droid little kid following the other stupid kids.

Go Thunderbirds!!
 It is hard to believe that adults can still believe in these fake vidoes. Especially when you guys hang out for years on a website exposing the bs. Maybe Legba is right about you guys. I just thought you guys are brain washed, perhaps you are being paid. Either way, you are pathetic.

It's a shame you refuse to participate in an intelligent conversation

^65 years old?

Hey, let's all listen to a total dickhead & his dickhead mates all say 'Um' for 38 minutes, with plenty of empty bullshit hand gestures for extra lulz...



Fucking LOL!!!