« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13   Go Down

Shuttle crashs

  • 360 Replies
  • 77482 Views
?

Germanicus

  • 485
  • +0/-0
  • Ave, Caesar, morituri te salutant
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #30 on: January 28, 2008, 02:31:27 PM »
Nitpicking
Logged
?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • +0/-0
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #31 on: January 28, 2008, 02:32:20 PM »
Yeah, what is up with that engy? You get nearly every thread off topic with your nitpicking...is that intentional????
Logged
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #32 on: January 28, 2008, 02:36:02 PM »
The fuel did not burn.  The shuttle did not explode.  It broke apart due to aerodynamic stress as the SRB pivoted.  This ruptured the ET which released the liquid oxygen and hydrogen.  This quickly turned to vapor and condensed water out of the atmosphere, giving the appearance of an explosion.
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
?

Germanicus

  • 485
  • +0/-0
  • Ave, Caesar, morituri te salutant
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #33 on: January 28, 2008, 02:37:18 PM »
Well you can nitpick all you want, but add something else to the conversation as well.
Logged
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #34 on: January 28, 2008, 02:37:59 PM »
Quote from: fshy94 on January 28, 2008, 02:32:20 PM
Yeah, what is up with that engy? You get nearly every thread off topic with your nitpicking...is that intentional????
I like to correct mistakes.  Especially when you people think I made the mistake.
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • +0/-0
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #35 on: January 28, 2008, 02:39:35 PM »
Yes on aerodynamic failure due to the SRB. However, the fuel did undergo localized combustion, which, along with the condensation, gave the appearance of an explosion. At any rate...does it matter?

We clearly agree that the fuel was there, which was the main point I was making. Relax, engy, and have you taken your meds?

EDIT: Oh, and the mistake I thought you had made wasn't this point. I thought, for the 2nd time, that you were claiming there were two separate vehicles that looked like the shuttles...
Logged
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #36 on: January 28, 2008, 02:49:44 PM »
Quote from: fshy94 on January 28, 2008, 02:39:35 PM
Yes on aerodynamic failure due to the SRB. However, the fuel did undergo localized combustion, which, along with the condensation, gave the appearance of an explosion. At any rate...does it matter?
You thought it important enough to try to correct me.

Quote
We clearly agree that the fuel was there, which was the main point I was making. Relax, engy, and have you taken your meds?
No.  I didn't know I took meds.
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • +0/-0
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #37 on: January 28, 2008, 02:51:02 PM »
::)
Logged
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!
*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65234
  • +17/-49
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #38 on: January 28, 2008, 03:49:21 PM »
he takes moderator meds
Logged
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?
*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #39 on: January 28, 2008, 05:24:49 PM »
Pills that cause PMS?
Logged
*

Jack

  • Administrator
  • 5180
  • +2/-6
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #40 on: January 28, 2008, 06:00:31 PM »
Engy's right. It wasn't really an explosion. The Challenger was basically ripped apart due to aerodynamic forces, and the liquid oxygen and hydrogen it released created the clouds as if they would look like fireballs. No explosion.

Quote from: wikipedia
Contrary to the flight dynamics officer's initial statement, the shuttle and external tank did not actually "explode". Instead they rapidly disintegrated under tremendous aerodynamic forces, since the shuttle was past "Max Q", or maximum aerodynamic pressure. When the external tank disintegrated, the fuel and oxidizer stored within it were released, producing the appearance of a massive fireball. However, according to the NASA team that analyzed imagery after the accident, there was only "localized combustion" of propellant.[8] Instead, the visible cloud was primarily composed of vapor and gases resulting from the release of the shuttle's liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen propellant. Stored in cryogenic conditions, the liquid hydrogen could not have ignited rapidly enough to trigger an "explosion" in the traditional sense of a detonation (as opposed to a deflagration, which was what occurred). Had there been a true explosion, the entire shuttle would have been instantly destroyed, killing the crew at that moment.
Logged
?

The Terror

  • 1773
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Propane Tank
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #41 on: January 29, 2008, 03:44:26 AM »
Anyway, so we've agreed that a shuttle isn't actually a high altitude glider and it does carry fuel
Logged
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #42 on: January 29, 2008, 08:10:31 AM »
I thought we had agreed that the shuttle was a high altitude glider. ???
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
?

eric bloedow

Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #43 on: January 29, 2008, 09:10:37 AM »
as a matter of fact, most of it's fuel is carried in the big "external tank" during takeoff. but it glides back down...

actually, i heard that it's not really gliding, more of a controlled plummet!

or as a movie character put it, "falling with style".
Logged
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #44 on: January 29, 2008, 09:12:18 AM »
Quote from: eric bloedow on January 29, 2008, 09:10:37 AM
actually, i heard that it's not really gliding, more of a controlled plummet!
Which would be the definition of gliding...
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #45 on: January 29, 2008, 09:15:10 AM »
Looks like TheEngineer wins again; never gets old.
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

bobboobles

  • 47
  • +0/-0
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #46 on: January 29, 2008, 09:27:14 AM »
Quote from: divito the truthist on January 29, 2008, 09:15:10 AM
Looks like TheEngineer wins again; never gets old.

At semantics maybe.
Logged
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #47 on: January 29, 2008, 09:32:22 AM »
Quote from: bobboobles on January 29, 2008, 09:27:14 AM
At semantics maybe.

At using the correct words and phrases. Which is usually the difference between being right or wholly inaccurate/just plain wrong.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2008, 09:41:44 AM by divito the truthist »
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • +0/-0
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #48 on: January 29, 2008, 10:13:23 AM »
Quote from: TheEngineer on January 29, 2008, 09:12:18 AM
Quote from: eric bloedow on January 29, 2008, 09:10:37 AM
actually, i heard that it's not really gliding, more of a controlled plummet!
Which would be the definition of gliding...

I dunno, but I always considered gliding to be better than a controlled plummet. Besides, I thought the external tank just plummets, no control. I always thought it broke up on crashing into the ocean... The SRB's on the other hand...
Logged
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #49 on: January 29, 2008, 10:17:39 AM »
glide:

4.   Aeronautics.
a.   to move in the air, esp. at an easy angle downward, with less engine power than for level flight, solely by the action of air currents and gravity, or by momentum already acquired.
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • +0/-0
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #50 on: January 29, 2008, 10:20:34 AM »
plum·met (plŭm'ĭt)
n.

   1. See plumb bob.
   2. Something that weighs down or oppresses; a burden.

intr.v., -met·ed, -met·ing, -mets.

   1. To fall straight down; plunge.
   2. To decline suddenly and steeply: Stock prices plummeted.

Get me now?
Logged
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!
*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #51 on: January 29, 2008, 10:22:47 AM »
Quote from: TheEngineer on January 29, 2008, 09:12:18 AM
Quote from: eric bloedow on January 29, 2008, 09:10:37 AM
actually, i heard that it's not really gliding, more of a controlled plummet!
Which would be the definition of gliding...

Either way, the Challenger didn't explode. What else was being discussed?
« Last Edit: January 29, 2008, 10:24:38 AM by divito the truthist »
Logged
Quote from: Proleg on April 22, 2009, 08:50:08 AM
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good
?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • +0/-0
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #52 on: January 29, 2008, 10:29:15 AM »
Not much. Besides, I didn't claim it exploded. I just used the common term for the incident, which is Challenger explosion. Do a google search, its the common term. Besides, the main question here was why would NASA fake shuttle failures if they are merely fake turboprops...
Logged
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!
?

bobboobles

  • 47
  • +0/-0
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #53 on: January 29, 2008, 12:58:30 PM »
Quote from: fshy94 on January 29, 2008, 10:13:23 AM
Quote from: TheEngineer on January 29, 2008, 09:12:18 AM
Quote from: eric bloedow on January 29, 2008, 09:10:37 AM
actually, i heard that it's not really gliding, more of a controlled plummet!
Which would be the definition of gliding...

I dunno, but I always considered gliding to be better than a controlled plummet. Besides, I thought the external tank just plummets, no control. I always thought it broke up on crashing into the ocean... The SRB's on the other hand...

The external large red tank isn't released till the shuttle reaches orbit. The tank stays in orbit. Only the 2 SRB's come back to earth.
Logged
?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • +0/-0
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #54 on: January 29, 2008, 01:04:42 PM »
No, there's no way anybody would let that large a piece of space junk up there. Do you know what kind of damage a speeding golf-ball sized object can do in orbit? It can wreck an entire compartment, if not the entirety of, the International Space Station. Now imagine that fuel tank there, whacking satellites after satellite. No. Freaking. Way.
Logged
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!
?

Officer Friendly

  • 12
  • +0/-0
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #55 on: January 29, 2008, 02:45:54 PM »
The ET is jettisoned when empty, just after MECO, then 'plummets' back into the ocean. It's released high enough NASA hopes it breaks up on the way down, then it's lost to the sea.
I think it was discovery that had 7 layers of laminate fracture after being hit with a flake of paint. Imagine the fuel tank coming at you.
Logged
*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #56 on: January 29, 2008, 03:19:08 PM »
Quote from: Officer Friendly on January 29, 2008, 02:45:54 PM
The ET is jettisoned when empty, just after MECO, then 'plummets' back into the ocean. It's released high enough NASA hopes it breaks up on the way down, then it's lost to the sea.
I think it was discovery that had 7 layers of laminate fracture after being hit with a flake of paint. Imagine the fuel tank coming at you.
It was a lot bigger than a flake of paint.
Logged


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson
?

eric bloedow

Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #57 on: January 29, 2008, 04:09:25 PM »
i seem to remember an old story-i forget if it was fiction or real plans-where the shuttle would take the big tanks into orbit...and make them a permanent part of the ISS!
Logged
*

Raist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 30499
  • +0/-0
  • The cat in the Matrix
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #58 on: January 29, 2008, 04:40:53 PM »
Quote from: eric bloedow on January 29, 2008, 04:09:25 PM
i seem to remember an old story-i forget if it was fiction or real plans-where the shuttle would take the big tanks into orbit...and make them a permanent part of the ISS!
I remember hearing a story where they dumped sand through this gate that gets objects near the speed of light when they come out the other side. The sand hit a fleet of ships and decimated them.
Logged
?

The Terror

  • 1773
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth Propane Tank
Re: Shuttle crashs
« Reply #59 on: January 30, 2008, 03:18:07 AM »
Quote from: TheEngineer on January 29, 2008, 08:10:31 AM
I thought we had agreed that the shuttle was a high altitude glider. ???

Taken from wikipedia

After landing, the vehicle stands on the runway for several minutes to permit the fumes from poisonous hydrazine, used as a propellant for attitude control, to dissipate, and for the shuttle fuselage to cool before the astronauts disembark.

Why are you being so pedantic? It's obvious that the shuttle isn't just a high altitude glider.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13   Go Up
« previous next »